Page 15 - bocconea_2007

Bocconea 20 — 2007 19

16. References
In the References, papers and books that have been looked up are included. Not all proc-
tologues of the listed taxa are quoted. In these cases it has been accepted what reported in
the original source.

17. Latin form
The Latin language is used:
a) in the field names;
b) in a second field, when useful;
c) in quotations from auct. pl.

18. Which taxonomy?
According to the authors of this Catalogue (in agreement with the majority of the active
th
st
taxonomists between the second half of the 20 century and the beginning of the 21 cen-
tury) the taxonomy today could be only considered as a populational taxonomy and not
more a typological taxonomy, as from the age of Linneo (1753) until the 1960s. The idea
of the populational conception in systematics and taxonomy has been already introduced
th
in the first half of the 20 century by Turesson (1922: The genotypic response of the plant
species to the habitat. Hereditas 3: 211 - 330, quoted by Mayr 1982). The Turesson’s pro-
posal soon conquered several greater botanists. Beginning from the concept of polytypic
species, very present in the typological taxonomy, were introduced the concepts of mor-
phospecies (morphotype), ecospecies (ecotype), cenospecies (cenotype), etc.
Unfortunately not always it has been possible to use the populational point of view,
because this Catalogue follows a compilative approach based on published literature. It is
important then to respect the author’s taxonomic point of view even if it follows the typo-
logical vision. For the authors, the subspecies rank is an expression of populations of dif-
ferent geographic distribution (allopathy) or of those populations living in the same area
but in different ecological niches (sympathy). These populations, genetically differentiat-
ed, might be new species in formation. The variety rank corresponds to intra-populational
variation and so also the form a lower level. This interpretation was common among the
typological botanists but it was indistinct from other interpretations. It is obvious that, for
example, the expression “together with the type” very common in Fiori (1923-1929), is
unequivocally referring to such interpretation of variety. Finally the “form”, in the typo-
logical botanists conception, is referred to phenotypic conditionings determined by the
habitat, the humidity produced by the atmosphere and by the ground, by variations of tem-
perature and rain, etc. It is not a genetically determined variation but it concerns a direct
influence of the atmosphere on the individual, even though mediated from the genetic
equipment (from its DNA). In order to study the question of the “form” according to the
typological taxonomists it may be necessary to carry out biosystematics, statistic and other
fine analytic methods.
Recently, old “forms” have been transferred to species or subspecies rank. In this
Catalogue, only few “forms” have been inserted: