Talk:Malva
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The generic boundaries between Malva, Lavatera and Althaea are uncertain, but to the best of my knowledge there are currently 26 species placed in the genus, incuding several recently transferred from Lavatera. When the dust settles there could be as few as 20 or as many as 45 species. There are probably additionally a number of names in Malva where the correct identify of the plant isn't known. S.R. Hinsley, 158.152.112.82 22:57, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
I believe that the fruit of the Common Mallow is referred to by children as "cheesies" based on their tiny cheesewheel appearance.
[edit] New Species List
- Malva bakeri (sic) should be Malva microphylla - ref. Lagascalia 26.
- Malva dendromorpha and Malva eriocalyx are synonyms - Lagascalia 26 seems to say that Malva veneta is the correct name for this species (long known as Lavatera arborea. The last predates Malva fastuosa.
- Malva linnaei and Malva psuedolavatera are synonyms - both replacing Lavatera cretica.
- Malva durieui (replacing Lavatera mauritanica) is missing
- Malva wigandii (replaced Lavatera maritima) is missing - but it is alleged that Malva subovata is the correct name for this species.
- Lavatera abyssinica should be there, but I don't know of any published name in Malva for that species.
- If you're taking the African Plant Database as authoritative Malva subacaulis should be included.
- The Californian species (Mm. assurgentiflora, lindsayi, occidentalis and pacifica) are missing
- There's three more species given in Flora Iranica (Mm. bucharica, pamiroaltaica and leonardii)
- Malva australiana (or behriana) (replacing Lavatera plebeia) is missing.
- I'd reject 7 of the species listed.
The relevant page at Malvaceae Info is the Malva alliance page, but it seems like it's time for me do another revision of that page, and add a nomenclatural review. I hadn't done the list of Malva species myself because I would have been committing original research. Lavateraguy 21:47, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
- The line between original research and ordinary editing (such as deciding which sources to cite) can be a fine one, and there are plenty of cases of nomenclature where wikipedia should follow rather than lead. But in those cases where the sources are there (Lagascalia, African Plant Database, you'd know better than I), sure, we should reflect them (with suitable footnotes). It would also be OK to have our list be a partial one, especially if the state of scholarship on this genus makes it hard to construct a complete, reliable list. Kingdon 17:25, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
-
- The sources aren't consistent.
-
-
- An Italian paper sinks Lavatera in Malva, but there's no name in Malva for the later described Lavatera valdesii. Other's don't. There may be no names in Malva for other species (not found in Italy).
- There are at least 4 species (ex Lavatera) that have different names in different sources.
- Some sources accept segregate species that others reject. For example the Flora of Pakistan cited accepts four species that other sources reduce to synonymy with other species. (There's a 5th species there which is a new name to me, but I'd be tempted to consider that a synonym as well).
-
-
- Lavateraguy 19:16, 2 October 2007 (UTC)