Forum Topic

  1. Chamaecytisus palmensis

  2. 26/01/2014 9:19:06 a.m. Pieter Pelser

    Would this species be better placed in Cytisus (Pardo et al. 2004. Plant Systematics and Evolution 244: 93-119, Cristofolini &Troia. 2006. Taxon 55: 733-746, http://www.kew.org/lowo) as Cytisus proliferus L.f.?

  3. 1/02/2014 4:25:57 p.m. Peter de Lange

    Hi Pieter - yes it would I quite agree - NZPCN just hasn't done it yet.

    Thanks Peter

  4. 4/02/2014 11:50:30 a.m. Peter de Lange

    Hi Pieter - you may want to mention this issue to Landcare Research. Last year they became aware of the problem but I see that they have to retain two species in Chamaecytisus - C. palmensis and C. proliferus. They are quite explicit about this on the New Zealand Plant Names Database - see http://nzflora.landcareresearch.co.nz/default.aspx?NavControl=search&selected=NameSearch.

    I recollect I was in Sardegna when I was asked about this last year by Landcare staff. What I saw on Sardegna as Cytisus proliferus did not look anything remotely like our Chamaecytisus palmensis - but I am happy (personally) that Chamaecytisus palmensis is a Cytisus.

Reply to topic

(JPG format, max 500kB)

Your details:
*Type this security code

 
All forum submissions are subject to NZPCN website admin screening and will not appear to other members until moderated.