The ICPS Database puts monanthos and novae-zelandiae as synonyms of dichotoma. Taylor's monograph (1989) lists monanthos, novae-zelandiae, and dichotoma as separate species, but states the plants are rather similar and, for example, discusses his difficulty on page 119:[b said:Quote[/b] (Pyro @ Jan. 12 2005,7:55)]If memory serves me Taylor classified all these guys as different species and it is later researchers that has decided to clump them. I'll check my copy tonight...
[b said:Quote[/b] ]I thus find myself unable, with the material to hand, to resolve this problem in a completely satisfactory manner and must leave it to subsequent investigations in Australia and New Zealand to produce a better solution.
[b said:Quote[/b] ]I thus find myself unable, with the material to hand, to resolve this problem in a completely satisfactory manner and must leave it to subsequent investigations in Australia and New Zealand to produce a better solution.
Plant taxonomy is part art, part science. The splitters would tend to make every variation into a different species; the lumpers would combine these into a single species. Animal taxonomists tend to be gross lumpers compared to plant taxonomists. Consider the political and social ramifications of applying splitter plant taxonomy to humans.[b said:Quote[/b] (rattler_mt @ Jan. 12 2005,10:39)]i have a question then Bob. am i wrong to keep the plant labeled as U. novae-zelandiae? or should i change it to U. dichotoma var. novae-zelandiae?