Open AccessTaxonomy of the Triticeae: a historical perspective *
Author(s) -
BARKWORTH MARY E.
Publication year - 1992
Publication title -
hereditas
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.819
H-Index - 50
eISSN - 1601-5223
pISSN - 0018-0661
DOI - 10.1111/j.1601-5223.1992.tb00197.x
Subject(s) - triticeae , biology , tribe , nomenclature , taxon , evolutionary biology , reticulate , genealogy , taxonomy (biology) , natural history , linguistics , zoology , anthropology , botany , history , sociology , genetics , genome , philosophy , gene
The history of the Triticeae is replete with changes in generic concepts, caused by taxonomists' struggle with the task of representing its highly reticulate history within the hierarchical classification system demanded by scientific nomenclature. Disagreement over the criteria used for delimiting taxa is an additional complication. Linnaeus' goal was an easy identification scheme. Subsequent taxonomists sought to improve Linnaeus' scheme by making his genera more ‘natural’, a vague term encompassing both general similarity and relatedness. In the 1880s Bentham and Hackel published nearly identical treatments of the tribe. These became the standard for the next fifty years. In 1933 Nevski advocated an explicitly evolutionary treatment, including much narrower generic concepts. Several of Nevski's generic concepts were adopted by European taxonomists, but English speaking taxonomists continued to employ Bentham's. In the 1980s, Dewey and Love proposed that genera in the Triticeae should be determined primarily by genomic constitution. Although not all agree with treating such groups as genera, it has been found productive to interpret data in terms of such groups. This will aid us in understanding the history of the Triticeae and evolutionary processes in general, a more important objective than complete nomenclatural agreement.