重订藤山柳属的分类——续谈植物分类学工作方法

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

藤山柳属Clematoclethra(猕猴桃科)是中国特有属之一。本文作者研究了该属植物的

外部形态，统计了473张标本，结合地理分布，得出本属是一个单种属，并且是一个多型种的结

论。此种分为4个亚种。这与中国植物志的作者将本属分为20种和4变种不同。本文作者

虽强调标本室分类是生物系统学研究的基础，是必不可少的一步，但这种分类，其方法上必须

根据大量标本，从研究性状变异开始，然后确定各分类群的划分和等级，最后才根据植物命名

法规的模式方法，给予它们正确名称。作者还根据本属的姊妹群猕猴桃属和它们的外类群水

东哥属的地理分布，推断本属是一个新特有属。

关键词: 猕猴桃科, 藤山柳属, 分类, 特有属

Abstract:

Clematoclethra (Franch.) Maxim. is a genus endemic to China, and has its distribu-

tion center in the area from W. Henan eastwards and to N. Guangxi southwards. For the whole

genus, only 1 species comprising 4 subspecies is recognized in this treatment (see Fig. 3). Its

members are woody vines and grow in thickets. They are very attractive for their medium-sized

white to rosy flowers in spring and scarlet or purplish black to black berry-like fruits in au-

tumn. It is due to the inadequate knowledge of variation within the genus that Liang and Chen

(1984) have recognized 20 species and 4 varieties in the Flora Reipublicae Popularis Sinicae,

vol. 49 part 2, including 10 new species and 2 new varieties, just half of the total number of

species in the genus. Nearly simultaneously, C. Y. Chang (1983) described 2 new species from

Sichuan in addition. The binominal inflation has reduced the taxonomy of the genus to a state

of confusion and made floristic analysis difficult. Based on the principal key characters taken

from the descriptions in Liang and Chen (1984) and Chang (1983), 22 polygonal graphs are

presented for the 22 species in this article (Fig. 1: 1-22). Although the extreme forms, such

as those of C. argentifolia and C. actinidioides and that of C. scandens, are very different, there

are a series of intermediate polygons, which fall within the range bounded by the extremes and

bridge these extremes. We are disposed to consider the genus monotypic in view of this fact.

Actuall. Airy Srow (1936) already pointed out “Certain forms appear more distinct from others,

but on general it may be said that the ‘species’ o this genus are exceptionally arbitrary”. But

unfortunately, Airy Shaw’s warning was neglecled. In the present article, the outer morpho-

logy of the plants was extensively studied, which discloses that leaf-form, and all parts of flo-

wers are of little taxonomic significance. The statistical method and histograms were used for

evaluating the infraspecific variation. 473 herbarium sheets were treated. Based on the vestiture

of annual young branch, leaf, pedicel and calyx, flower numbers per inflorescence, and fruit

colour, the species, C. scandens, may be divided into 4 forms (Tab. 1). They each have a par-

ticular range but overlap somewhere (Fig. 3). Moreover, three forms occur at different elevations

in Mt. Emei, form 1 occurring at 1600-2000 m, form 3 at 1100-1800 m and form 4 at

1850-3100 m (Fig. 4). Inasmuch as the 4 forms are vicarious geographically and ecologically

and have differentiated relatively distinctly in 1-2 characters, they are here treated tentatively

as 4 subspecies, on the basis of herbarium study alone. A key to 4 subspecies is given as follows.

1. Annual young branches setose, fruits always scarlet at maturity ............ subsp. scandens (form 1)

1. Annual young branches without seta, if present, very rare and sparse, fruit always purplish-black

to black at maturity

2. Pedicel and calyx usually woolly, inflorescence usually with 3-7 (-12) flowers ........................

......................................................................................................... subsp. hemsleyi (form 2)

2. Pedicel and calyx usually not woolly

3. Leaf blades usually tomentose below, inflorescence usually with 3-6 flowers ........................

................................................................................................ subsp. tomentella (form 3)

3. Leaf blades usually glabrous or sparsely pilose below, inflorescence usually with 1-3 flo-

wers .................................................................................... subsp, actinidioides (form 4)

As a result of the study, more natural and reasonable boundaries between the taxa may have

been found. Someone may ask why the conclusion here made is so distinctly different from those

of the previous authors. We believe that the major concern in taxonomy, and also the first step

of classification, should be the assessment of characters and the understanding of their variation,

and then the choice of correct names of the taxa worthy of naming. The delimitation of species

should be based on correlation of characters and discontinuity of variation but not on the distan-

ce (or difference) from type-center. Here we by no means diminish the significance of type

specimens in taxonomy. They are indeed very important, but only used in nomenclature for

correct application of names. Davis and Heywood (1963: 10) are right when they said “only

names have types, not species”. It must be reminded that attention should be paid to the no-

ticeable inconsistency in delimitation of species in various volumes, even within a single family

written by different authors in Flora Rep. Pop. Sin., which makes comparison difficult. We

eagerly hope that the authors of Flora Rep. Pop. Sin. do more to alleviate this shortcoming in

next edition. Judging from the distribution pattern of its close relatives, the genera Actinidia and

Saurauia, We suggest that Clematoclethra is a new endemism. Actinidia is mainly distributed

in East Asia, with only 2 species extending fron temparate Asia to trapical regions of Ma-

laysia. Saurauia mainly occurs in tropical America and Asia, with a few species extending to

south China through Southeast Asia and one species reaching Sichuan.

This reassessment is just the beginning of study on Clematoclethra, but it is hoped that this

may help to stimulate further synthetic research on the group. We also confess to having not

seen many type specimens, and thus some synonyms may have been misplaced here. The deci-

sions have been made from the original descriptions only.

Key words: Actinidiaceae, Clematoclethra, Taxonomy, Endemic genus

汤彦承, 向秋云. 重订藤山柳属的分类——续谈植物分类学工作方法[J]. 中国科学院大学学报.

Tang Yan-Cheng, Xiang Qiu-Yun. A Reclassification of the Genus Clermatoclethra (Actinidiaceae) and Further Note on the Methodology of Plant Taxonomy[J]. .

[1]	冯齐心, 杨辽, 王伟胜, 陈桃, 黄双燕. 基于时序光谱重构的卷积神经网络遥感农作物分类[J]. 中国科学院大学学报, 2020, 37(5): 619-628.
[2]	唐思琦, 韩丛英, 郭田德. 基于机器学习的点集匹配算法[J]. 中国科学院大学学报, 2020, 37(4): 450-457.
[3]	赖训飞, 梁旭文, 谢卓辰, 李宗旺. 基于实体嵌入和长短时记忆网络的入侵检测方法[J]. 中国科学院大学学报, 2020, 37(4): 553-561.
[4]	赵择, 徐佑宇, 唐亮, 卜智勇. 基于改进一对一算法的网络流量分类[J]. 中国科学院大学学报, 2020, 37(4): 570-576.
[5]	李伯男, 赵彤, 吴敏. 基于胶囊网络的海量指纹纹型精准分类算法[J]. 中国科学院大学学报, 2020, 37(3): 387-397.
[6]	宋晗, 杨炜暾, 耿修瑞, 赵永超. 基于卷积神经网络与主动学习的高光谱图像分类[J]. 中国科学院大学学报, 2020, 37(2): 169-176.
[7]	康文佳, 林文辉, 张三国. 基于角度的变系数多分类支持向量机[J]. 中国科学院大学学报, 2019, 36(4): 449-460.
[8]	付盛, 薛原, 张三国. 基于角度的分类方法综述[J]. 中国科学院大学学报, 2019, 36(3): 289-298.
[9]	薛开平, 柳彬, 李威, 洪佩琳. 一种面向未知链路帧的格式特征提取与分类算法[J]. 中国科学院大学学报, 2018, 35(4): 521-528.
[10]	田洁, 王伟强, 孙翼. 一种免除二值化的视频叠加中文字符识别方法[J]. 中国科学院大学学报, 2018, 35(3): 402-408.
[11]	张妙然, 刘畅. 基于特征筛选和二级分类的极化SAR建筑提取算法[J]. 中国科学院大学学报, 2018, 35(1): 89-95.
[12]	江璐, 赵彤, 吴敏. 基于深度卷积神经网络的指纹纹型分类算法[J]. 中国科学院大学学报, 2016, 33(6): 808-814.
[13]	杨朝斌, 张树文, 卜坤, 于灵雪, 颜凤芹, 常丽萍, 杨久春. 高分辨率遥感影像在城市LUCC中的应用[J]. 中国科学院大学学报, 2016, 33(3): 289-297.
[14]	贾康康, 李军利, 乔从丰. 2×L×M×N×H 五体纠缠态分类[J]. 中国科学院大学学报, 2016, 33(3): 334-338.
[15]	公雪霜, 于丽君, 聂跃平, 朱建峰, 潘玉青. 辽宁西部地区先秦时期聚落遗址空间格局分析[J]. 中国科学院大学学报, 2016, 33(3): 373-379.

重订藤山柳属的分类——续谈植物分类学工作方法

A Reclassification of the Genus Clermatoclethra (Actinidiaceae) and Further Note on the Methodology of Plant Taxonomy

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

访问统计

联系我们