I answered an id question on another forum...one where I am a newbie. It was Abelia. However I have been told that Abelia is wrong...... "Silversurfer, your sources are outdated. The Abelia genus no longer exists. All of the Abelia species have been reclassified as Zabelia or Linnaea." I have checked RHS/ Kew/wiki etc but they still use Abelia. Please can you give me some help/advice
See: Twins are not alone: a recircumscription of Linnaea (Caprifoliaceae) | CHRISTENHUSZ | Phytotaxa (and a direct link to the paper: Twins are not alone: a recircumscription of Linnaea (Caprifoliaceae) | CHRISTENHUSZ | Phytotaxa ) Read the paper for the arguments.
Douglas and I had a brief discussion about it. The arguments made by Christenhusz seem pretty convincing (I like that he's willing to take on things that are well-established and re-examine them). Still, I'd like to see a few more places incorporate the proposed understanding; the only place so far that seems to have fully incorporated it is The Flora of New Zealand (online). One has to wonder if this is something that others will push back on because of the ornamental importance.
Many thanks Daniel and Douglas for giving me a link to a learned Botanic paper. Linnea borealis is one of my favourite small plant...we are rather lucky to have it growing wild in a wood just half mile from our home. I also love all Abelia, Dipelta, Kolkwitzia etc...but if I use the new names as mentioned ...will anyone begin to know what the heck I mean? I knew I would get your unbiased help/advice here on UBC...much appreciated.
The Swedish Wikipedia seems to have renamed the (many of the?) Abelia to Linnaea. This is a search results page, from the Swedish Caprifoliaceae page, searching for Abelia. I'm not actually getting to much information. English Wikipedia doesn't mention a change, only that some authors consider Linnaeaceae a separate family, with Abelia still listed.
