Humanity faces the challenge of conserving the attributes of biodiversity that may be essential to secure human wellbeing. Among all the organisms that are beneficial to humans, plants stand out as ...the most important providers of natural resources. Therefore, identifying plant uses is critical to preserve the beneficial potential of biodiversity and to promote basic and applied research on the relationship between plants and humans. However, much of this information is often uncritical, contradictory, of dubious value or simply not readily accessible to the great majority of scientists and policy makers. Here, we compiled a genus-level dataset of plant-use records for all accepted vascular plant taxa (13489 genera) using the information gathered in the 4.sup.th Edition of Mabberley's plant-book, the most comprehensive global review of plant classification and their uses published to date. From 1974 to 2017 all the information was systematically gathered, evaluated, and synthesized by David Mabberley, who reviewed over 1000 botanical sources including modern Floras, monographs, periodicals, handbooks, and authoritative websites. Plant uses were arranged across 28 standard categories of use following the Economic Botany Data Collection Standard guidelines, which resulted in a binary classification of 9478 plant-use records pertaining human and animal nutrition, materials, fuels, medicine, poisons, social and environmental uses. Of all the taxa included in the dataset, 33% were assigned to at least one category of use, the most common being "ornamental" (26%), "medicine" (16%), "human food" (13%) and "timber" (8%). In addition to a readily available binary matrix for quantitative analyses, we provide a control text matrix that links the former to the description of the uses in Mabberley's plant-book. We hope this dataset will serve to establish synergies between scientists and policy makers interested in plant-human interactions and to move towards the complete compilation and classification of the nature's contributions to people upon which the wellbeing of future generations may depend.
Two early validly published names for Assam tea (Camellia sinensis var. assamica “(Choisy) Kitam.)”) are identified: Thea assamica Royle ex Hook. 1847 and T. assamica Hort. Belg. ex Bosse 1854; an ...amended synonymy and a neotypification (with D.‐W. Zhao) for the name of Assam tea, C. sinensis var. assamica (Hook.) Steenis, are provided. The three editions (1829–1861) of Bosse's Vollständiges Handbuch der Blumengärtnerei are also the neglected places of publication of some plant‐names (or their basionyms) in current use; Grevillea lawrenceana Bosse (neotype designated here by P.M. Olde) is an earlier name for G. curviloba McGill. (Proteaceae); Hedera algeriensis (Araliaceae), the name used by Bosse for a now much‐cultivated ivy, was first published by Morren in 1853; an early valid, available name for the florist's cineraria (Senecio hybridus Bosse) is Cineraria ×kewensis Rob. (Compositae), here neotypified (with D.J.N. Hind); the basionym for the well‐known garden plant‐name, “Erysimum ×kewense” (Cruciferae) is identified and neotypified (with D.J.N. Hind), the accepted binomial validated. The currently accepted name for commercial fustic, Maclura tinctoria (Moraceae), was first validly published in Loudon's Hortus Britannicus (1830).
The breeding of new, high-quality citrus cultivars depends on dependable information about the relationships of taxa within the tribe Citreae; therefore, it is important to have a well-supported ...phylogeny of the relationships between species not only to advance breeding strategies, but also to advance conservation strategies for the wild taxa. The recent history of the systematics of Citrus (Rutaceae: Aurantioideae) and its allies, in the context of Rutaceae taxonomy as a whole, is reviewed. The most recent classification is tested using nine cpDNA sequence regions in representatives of all genera of the subfam. Aurantioideae (save Limnocitrus) and numerous species and hybrids referred to Citrus s.l. Aurantioideae are confirmed as monophyletic. Within Aurantioideae, tribe Clauseneae are not monophyletic unless Murraya s.s. and Merrillia are removed to Aurantieae. Within tribe Aurantieae, the three traditionally recognized subtribes are not monophyletic. Triphasiinae is not monophyletic unless Oxanthera is returned to Citrus (Citrinae). Balsamocitrinae is polyphyletic. Feroniella, traditionally considered allied closely to Limonia (=Feronia), is shown to be nested in CITRUS: The proposed congenericity of Severinia and Atalantia is confirmed. The most recent circumscription of Citrus is strongly supported by this analysis, with hybrids appearing with their putative maternal parents. The genus was resolved into two clades, one comprising wild species from New Guinea, Australia, and New Caledonia (formerly Clymenia, Eremocitrus, Microcitrus, Oxanthera), but surprisingly also Citrus medica, traditionally believed to be native in India. The second clade is largely from the Asian mainland (including species formerly referred to Fortunella and Poncirus).
An update of the Angiosperm Phylogeny Group (APG) classification of the orders and families of angiosperms is presented. Several new orders are recognized: Boraginales, Dilleniales, Icacinales, ...Metteniusiales and Vahliales. This brings the total number of orders and families recognized in the APG system to 64 and 416, respectively. We propose two additional informal major clades, superrosids and superasterids, that each comprise the additional orders that are included in the larger clades dominated by the rosids and asterids. Families that made up potentially monofamilial orders, Dasypogonaceae and Sabiaceae, are instead referred to Arecales and Proteales, respectively. Two parasitic families formerly of uncertain positions are now placed: Cynomoriaceae in Saxifragales and Apodanthaceae in Cucurbitales. Although there is evidence that some families recognized in APG III are not monophyletic, we make no changes in Dioscoreales and Santalales relative to APG III and leave some genera in Lamiales unplaced (e.g. Peltanthera). These changes in familial circumscription and recognition have all resulted from new results published since APG III, except for some changes simply due to nomenclatural issues, which include substituting Asphodelaceae for Xanthorrhoeaceae (Asparagales) and Francoaceae for Melianthaceae (Geraniales); however, in Francoaceae we also include Bersamaceae, Ledocarpaceae, Rhynchothecaceae and Vivianiaceae. Other changes to family limits are not drastic or numerous and are mostly focused on some members of the lamiids, especially the former Icacinaceae that have long been problematic with several genera moved to the formerly monogeneric Metteniusaceae, but minor changes in circumscription include Aristolochiaceae (now including Lactoridaceae and Hydnoraceae; Aristolochiales), Maundiaceae (removed from Juncaginaceae; Alismatales), Restionaceae (now re‐including Anarthriaceae and Centrolepidaceae; Poales), Buxaceae (now including Haptanthaceae; Buxales), Peraceae (split from Euphorbiaceae; Malpighiales), recognition of Petenaeaceae (Huerteales), Kewaceae, Limeaceae, Macarthuriaceae and Microteaceae (all Caryophyllales), Petiveriaceae split from Phytolaccaceae (Caryophyllales), changes to the generic composition of Ixonanthaceae and Irvingiaceae (with transfer of Allantospermum from the former to the latter; Malpighiales), transfer of Pakaraimaea (formerly Dipterocarpaceae) to Cistaceae (Malvales), transfer of Borthwickia, Forchhammeria, Stixis and Tirania (formerly all Capparaceae) to Resedaceae (Brassicales), Nyssaceae split from Cornaceae (Cornales), Pteleocarpa moved to Gelsemiaceae (Gentianales), changes to the generic composition of Gesneriaceae (Sanango moved from Loganiaceae) and Orobanchaceae (now including Lindenbergiaceae and Rehmanniaceae) and recognition of Mazaceae distinct from Phrymaceae (all Lamiales).
PDF
