1992
DOI: 10.1002/j.1996-8175.1992.tb02575.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Proposals to Conserve or Reject

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

1998
1998
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 92 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…), while “osteospermum […] spinosum & viscosum” was included as a synonym of his O. spinosum L. Green in Hitchcock & Green (1929: 184) designated O. moniliferum L. as type of Osteospermum . However, since O. moniliferum differs from all other members of Osteospermum except O. incanum by having drupes, O. spinosum L. was conserved as generitype (Nicholson, 1992; Brummitt, 1995). Consequently, the genus Chrysanthemoides continued to be recognized with two species: C. incana (Burm.f.)…”
Section: Nomenclatural Treatmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…), while “osteospermum […] spinosum & viscosum” was included as a synonym of his O. spinosum L. Green in Hitchcock & Green (1929: 184) designated O. moniliferum L. as type of Osteospermum . However, since O. moniliferum differs from all other members of Osteospermum except O. incanum by having drupes, O. spinosum L. was conserved as generitype (Nicholson, 1992; Brummitt, 1995). Consequently, the genus Chrysanthemoides continued to be recognized with two species: C. incana (Burm.f.)…”
Section: Nomenclatural Treatmentmentioning
confidence: 99%