Subject: Re: [Q] Correct classification of FABACEAE and related (sub)

From: [email-masked]
Date: 28 Jul 95 14:17:43 -0500

In article <07-27-1995.13523@mabell>, [email-masked] (Mark A. Abell) writes:
> What is the _current_ correct classification of this group of families?
> 
> is it :-
>   FABACEAE subf. FABOIDEAE
>   FABACEAE subf. CAESALPINOIDEAE
>   FABACEAE subf. MIMOSOIDAE
> 
> or is it :-
>   FABACEAE
>   CAESALPINIACEAE
>   MIMOSACEAE

Both classifications are correct, and both are current.  Pick the one
you like.  Also, the name Leguminosae is a legal substitute for
Fabaceae.  Pick up any plant taxonomy text and read the section on
family names, synonomy, and the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature.

Kay Klier  [email-masked]

---

From: [email-masked] (Mark A. Abell)
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 95 09:40:27 +1000

is it :-
  FABACEAE subf. FABOIDEAE

or is it :-
  FABACEAE
  CAESALPINIACEAE
  MIMOSACEAE

They are refered to differently in some of the books that I have seen
lately and I was wondering what was the correct grouping.

Also is the plant that was prevoiusly known of as Cassia artemisoides
now called Senna artemisoides ?

Thanks,
Mark A. Abell   - SYDNEY, AUSTRALIA    [email-masked]
Mark A. Abell
Practical Solutions.

---

From: Scott Ranger <[email-masked]>
Date: 30 Jul 1995 00:41:54 GMT

Kartez, John.  1994.  A synonymized checklist of the vascular flora of 
the United States, Canada, and Greenland, second edition, volume 
1-checklist.  Timber Press, Portland, OR.

This reference is the most ambitious attempt to date for NA, and Kartesz 
went to a huge list of specialists to get the best and latest thinking.

His volume continues to lump the three subfamilies into a large and 
floristically diverse Fabaceae.

Cassia artemisiodes Gaud. ex DC.   

is now considered

Senna artemisioides (Gaud. ex DC.) Randell