(112–114) Requests for binding decisions on whether the names in each of the pairwise comparisons between <i>Blackiella</i> Aellen (<i>Chenopodiaceae</i> / <i>Amaranthaceae</i> s.l.), <i>Blakiella</i> Cuatrec. (<i>Asteraceae</i>), and <i>Blakella</i> (L.D. Pryor &amp; L.A.S. Johnson ex Brooker) Crisp &amp; L.G. Cook (<i>Myrtaceae</i>) are sufficiently alike to be confused

(112) Blackiella Aellen (1938) [Angiosp.: Chenopod. / Amaranth.] Blakiella Cuatrec. (1969) [Angiosp.: Aster.] (113) Blackiella Aellen (1938) [Angiosp.: Chenopod. / Amaranth.] Blakella (L.D. Pryor & L.A.S. Johnson ex Brooker) Crisp & L.G. Cook (2024) [Angiosp.: Myrt.] (114) Blakiella Cuatrec. (1969) [Angiosp.: Aster.] Blakella (L.D. Pryor & L.A.S. Johnson ex Brooker) Crisp & L.G. Cook (2024) [Angiosp.: Myrt.] In their article just published online before print (23 Jan 2024), Crisp & al. (in J. Syst. Evol.: https://doi.org/10.1111/jse.13047) advocated a narrow generic delimitation in eucalypts (Eucalyptus L'Hér. s.l., Myrtaceae) and validated the new generic name Blakella (L.D. Pryor & L.A.S. Johnson ex Brooker) Crisp & L.G. Cook (in J. Syst. Evol., https://doi.org/10.1111/jse.13047: 16 of 21. 2024) based on Eucalyptus subg. Blakella L.D. Pryor & L.A.S. Johnson ex Brooker (in Austral. Syst. Bot. 13: 89. 2000 ≡ Corymbia subg. Blakella (L.D. Pryor & L.A.S. Johnson ex Brooker) Parra-Os. & Ladiges in Austral. Syst. Bot. 22: 397. 2009), which was “named after the late Stanley Thatcher Blake of the Queensland Herbarium, who contributed greatly to our understanding of tropical eucalypts” (Brooker, l.c.). However, the authors did not mention two very similar pre-existing validly published generic names, Blakiella Cuatrec. (in Webbia 24: 37. 1969), a currently accepted South American genus of Asteraceae, named after Sidney Fay Blake, and Blackiella Aellen (in Bot. Jahrb. Syst. 68: 423. 1938 ≡ Atriplex subg. Blackiella (Aellen) Maire, Fl. Afrique N. 8: 91. 1962), originally described as an Australian genus in Chenopodiaceae / Amaranthaceae s.l. and named after John McConnell Black, but currently submerged in Atriplex L. (see Wilson in George, Fl. Austral. 4: 84. 1984, and references below). In addition, there is the name Blackiella Shumenko (in Sokolov, Prakt. Rukov. Mikrofaune SSSR [Практическое руководство по микрофауне СССР. Известковый нанопланктон / A practical guide to the microfauna of the USSR. Vol. 1. Calcareous nanoplankton] 1: 39. 1987) proposed for fossil microalgae (Haptophyceae: Coccolithophycidae) from the Albian (Lower Cretaceous) of the British Isles; it is validly published (Art. 39.1 of the ICN: Turland & al. in Regnum Veg. 159. 2018) but is an illegitimate later homonym of Blackiella Aellen. In English, the two family names on which generic eponyms are based are pronounced quite differently: Blake [bleɪk] and Black [blæk]. However, people whose native language is not English and who may be unaware of the origin of these generic names of plants (or who follow the modern Latin rules of pronunciation) may pronounce the names Blackiella and Blakiella identically. Thus, someone who does not know that Blakella is derived from Blake could as well pronounce it like “Blackella” (as if derived from Black). Also, the difference in just one letter between the names Blakiella and Blakella is very slight and thus can be misleading or confusing. Moreover, we think that these names are quite similar phonetically. These genus-rank eponyms are also based on the same family name, Blake. As currently accepted, Blakiella Cuatrec. (Asteraceae) is a monotypic (monospecific) genus containing just one species, B. bartsiifolia (S.F. Blake) Cuatrec. (l.c.: 41; ≡ Podocoma bartsiifolia S.F. Blake in Contr. U.S. Natl. Herb. 20: 534. 1924), occurring in the northern part of South America (Colombia and Venezuela) (see Compositae Working Group [CWG], Global Compositae Database, https://www.compositae.org/gcd/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1097355, accessed 4 Mar 2024). Molecular phylogenetic studies (see Kadereit & al. in Amer. J. Bot. 97: 1664–1687. 2010; Žerdoner Čalasan & al. in Perspect. Pl. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 54: 125660. 2022, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ppees.2022.125660, and references therein) convincingly demonstrated that the taxa placed by Aellen in his Blackiella are phylogenetically deeply rooted in the Atriplex group and thus the resurrection of the generic status of Blackiella is unlikely. There are two main different approaches to the problem of generic delimitation in the eucalypts, one favoring the narrow circumscription of genera (see Crisp & al., l.c., and references therein) and another preferring a wide circumscription of Eucalyptus, including Angophora Cav., Corymbia K.D. Hill & L.A.S. Johnson, and the recently segregated Blakella (see Brooker, l.c.: 79–148; Nicolle in Swainsona 38: 125–126. 2024, and references therein). If the names Blackiella Aellen and Blakiella Cuatrec. are deemed sufficiently alike to be confused (Req. 112), then either (1) a new genus-rank name will be needed for the South American taxon currently known as Blakiella Cuatrec., or (2) a proposal to conserve the name Blakiella Cuatrec. against Blackiella Aellen should be considered. If the name Blakella (L.D. Pryor & L.A.S. Johnson ex Brooker) Crisp & L.G. Cook is considered sufficiently alike to the name(s) Blackiella Aellen and/or Blakiella Cuatrec. to be confused with one or both of them (Req. 113 & 114), then either (1) a new generic name should be proposed for the group of eucalypts recently segregated as the genus Blakella or (2) its conservation against Blackiella Aellen and/or Blakiella Cuatrec. could be considered. However, under a wide circumscription of Eucalyptus (see above), the issue of similarity of these names is not so important. Following Art. 53.4 of the ICN, we request binding decisions through the Nomenclature Committees to bring stability to the nomenclature of the mentioned taxa. We are grateful to John McNeill (Royal Botanic Garden, Edinburgh, Scotland, U.K. & Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto, Ontario, Canada) and John H. Wiersema (Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C., U.S.A.) for their useful comments and advice.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.