|
διάσπαση σε |
|
I think so? Sorry for missing that! Since I didn't see M. aurantiacus under the list of its synonyms anywhere, it slipped past. See previous discussion here: https://www.inaturalist.org/posts/18699-diplacus-dilemma-in-california-area
Per Tulig & Nesom 2012, D. linearis has been previously treated as:
Mimulus linearis Benth.
Mimulus glutinosus var. linearis (Benth.) A. Gray
Mimulus glutinosus forma linearis (Benth.) Voss
Mimulus longiflorus var. linearis (Benth.) A.L. Grant
Diplacus longiflorus var. linearis
Nesom 2013 says "Diplacus linearis was allied by Pennell (1947) with the Sierran D. grandiflorus as a narrower-leaved and smaller-flowered subspecies [confusingly, as Mimulus bifidus subsp. fasciculatus]. The two were considered synonymous by Thompson (2005) [as Mimulus aurantacus var. grandiflorus], but they are disjunct in geography and ecology."
Shouldn't D. linearis be in here? I know Nesom (2013) says "Treatment of D. linearis as a nothospecies is speculative" but it's in POWO: http://plantsoftheworldonline.org/taxon/urn:lsid:ipni.org:names:81406-2