On 13/01/2014 18:51, Jeff Layman wrote:
On 13/01/2014 16:01, David Hill wrote:
Interesting article about the above.
http://davesgarden.com/guides/articles/view/4616/

Nothing particularly unusual - it's going on all over the plant taxonomy
world.

For example, in Australia, it is proposed that "Acacia" will become
"Racosperma", and "Dryandra" will disappear - they will now be "Banksia".

The rules have been bent (the genus Acacia has been retypified replacing
the original African type species Acacia nilotica by Acacia penninervis)
to retain the name Acacia for the larger group, including the Australian
species.

http://www.ingentaconnect.com/conten...00005/art00033


About 40 years ago I remember reading a controversial article (possible
from the American journal "Science"), which, IIRC, basically argued that
flora were unsuited to the sort of taxonomical classification which
worked well for fauna.


--
Stewart Robert Hinsley