Classification of Acer following the Accepted Names in the Genus

This has been mentioned earlier in the thread but I thought it is worth repeating. The treatment of Acer amoenum as a species is published in Flora of Japan since at least 1999, most likely since before then also. Crowley et al have not proposed this treatment, they have simply accepted it. Flora of Japan is a freely available, if expensive, publication and must be considered the definitive work on the taxonomy of plant species native to Japan. Aceraceae is covered in Volume 2c

 

The confusion, wrt my paper, is that I followed the classification proposed by Crowley, and building upon de Jong 2002. The species names are from the ANL, and it is there where Acer amoenum is adopted.

This is back to the confusion over the systemic classification, compared to the updated species list which is ANL.