PLANT NAME CHANGES
63
NAME CHANGES IN STACE’S NEW FLORA OF THE BRITISH ISLES M. N. SANFORD About eighteen years ago, I wrote a short note for White Admiral with this title (Sanford, 1999) covering changes in nomenclature in the British Flora following publication of the 2nd edition of Clive Stace’s Flora of the British Isles (Stace, 1997). Now that the 3rd edition is out (Stace, 2010a), it is time to bring this up to date and review a further round of name changes. Past changes have largely been the result of taxonomic research or in some cases discovery of earlier published names that must take precedence according to the International Code. This time, the changes are a bit more substantial and there has also been considerable alteration of the higher structure of families. The driving force behind these changes has been the advance in molecular systematics. This has enabled the construction of a new phylogeny based on DNA sequencing rather than external features of a plant – ‘a scheme that is expected to endure for centuries to come’. The first two editions of Stace’s Flora had followed the popular classification system of Cronquist. ‘Stace 3’ is the first British Flora to move to the new classification set out by the Angiosperm Phylogeny Group (APG, 2009) currently also in its third edition (known as APG III). People are naturally reluctant to adopt a new system, particularly when it means accepting cryptic characters (DNA) over visible ones, but there can be little doubt that the new system, which represents the natural relationships between groups of plants based on their changes through evolution, will soon become the standard that all modern floras follow. Stace has described the impact of molecular systematics on plant classification, particularly in the British Flora, in a useful summary paper for the BSBI journal Watsonia (Stace, 2010). The changes are discussed under four headings: No change here, then (little or no impact) Many of the large, well-known families such as Asteraceae, Brassicaceae, Lamiaceae and Poaceae are the same whether defined by molecular or phenetic data. The fact that these families remain largely unchanged is a strong endorsement of the molecular system and it works even in families like Rosaceae where there is a wide variation in the features of flower and fruit morphology. Welcome back old friends (changes that represent reversions to previous classifications) Families such as Liliaceae and Scrophulariaceae have been radically transformed by molecular data, but some of the new groupings are familiar from earlier taxonomic studies. The Liliaceae has been divided into Tofieldiaceae, Nartheciaceae, Melanthiaceae (Paris), Alstroemeriaceae, Colchicaeae, Xanthorrhoeaceae, Alliaceae and Asparagaceae leaving only a few genera in Liliaceae sensu stricto (e.g. Lilium, Fritillaria, Tulipa and Gagea). Equally drastic changes have occurred in the Scrophulariaceae: moving the semi-parasitic genera like Rhinanthus into the Orobanchaceae is not surprising. The split of Veronica, Digitalis, and Linaria etc. into
Trans. Suffolk Nat. Soc. 46 (2010)