mel turner schreef
"No"?

Care to elaborate and clarify?

***
Well, I can try.
* * *

No, _Acacia farnesiana_ wasn't classified as a member of _Acacia_
subgenus _Acacia_,

***
No, that is not it. That is correct, as far as it goes.
* * *

or no, the group containing the type species of
_Acacia_ won't be the group that must be considered _Acacia, s.s._
in any revised classifications?

***
This too is eminently correct, but you are missing something
* * *

With regard to your earlier suggestion that the bipinnate New Mexico
species may belong to the genus Acaciella, well, yes and no.

***
I checked, and indeed Acacia farnesiana is quite unlikely to end up in
Acaciella, although other American species will.

Sorry to be so mysterious. I am just curious to see how fast the word
spreads
PvR