Can somebody help me in this? In submediterranean phytogeographical region of northwest Balkan Peninsula, on top of Mt. Zbevnica, 1.014 m (3.327 feet), northwest Croatia, dry rocky Karst meadows, carbonate bedrock, I found a beautiful plant which is nearly certain a Veronica. According to Slovenian plant determination key (Martincic et all, Mala Flora Slovenije (1999)) it name should be Veronica jacquinii (Baumg). However IPNI knows V. jacquinii only as a basionym of Veronica austriaca L. subsp. jacquinii. In my favorite picture-key Haeupler, Muer, "Bildatlas der Farn-und Bluetenpflanzen Deutschland (2000)", Ulmer, p437 I find a description and a picture, which both excellently correspond to the plant on my photos. For its currently valid name V. austriaca ssp. jacquinii (Baumg) Eb.Fisher is stated. In addition, as a synonym V. jacquinii (p757) is also stated. So far, everything good. Everything depends on whether the plant is considered as a species or as a subspecies, depending on the approach to taxonomic classification. This certainly goes beyond my level of knowledge. But, in the same book (p437) also a description and a picture of another, quite different, Veronica, V. austriaca ssp. austriaca, can be found. The plant I found doesn't correspond to this description. My problem begins when I look at Flora Europaea, RGBE. Here both names V. jacquinii (Baumg) and V. austriaca L. subsp. jacquinii (Baumg) Maly are stated as synonyms of currently valid name Veronica austriaca L. subsp. austriaca. This apparently contradicts to IPNI as well as to Haeupler, Muer. What would be the correct currently valid name for the plant on my photos? Thanks in advance for help and Warmest regards Amadej Trnkoczy
Amadej, I suspect you do not properly appreciate that there may be competing classifications of a plant group and all may be legitimate, depending on whether your preference is for broadly or narrowly defined taxa. I don't have the literature at hand as you do, but it seems that the taxon known as V. jacquinii at species rank has alternatively been treated at subspecies rank, as V. austriaca subsp. jacquinii. Then it seems also that some botanists, as in Flora Europaea, have adopted even broader concepts, and do not even recognise subsp. jacquinii as meriting recognition as distinct from subsp. austriaca; that is what is implied when the former is listed as a synonym of the latter. But you say your plant looks quite different from V. austriaca subsp. austriaca? In plant taxonomy there can be various reasons for this sort of thing. One possibility is that the taxon is highly variable, even within a subspecies. Another is that a name has been misapplied in a reference to some taxon other than the one that contains its type. IPNI makes no claims about "correctness" of names listed in it. It is merely a compilation of all plant names ever published, regardless of their taxonomic worth. It may give cross-references to other combinations of the same published epithet, and it may note that a name is illegitimate if it is a later name than another with the same nomenclatural type. But it does not go beyond that.
Thank you for your reply Tony. You are right that my understanding of ordering plants in a system is influenced by my background, which is technical, accustomed more to deterministic systems than to highly variable live organisms. Some time ago I imagined that there existed a kind of 'Bible', internationally accepted taxonomy. Now I am slowly realizing that this is not the case. Thank you also for your explanation of IPNI. I thought that this might be something what could generate 'generally valid names' (even if only 'currently'). But I am learning. In respect to Veronica austriaca ssp. jacquinii I was particularly confused because in the Haeupler, Muer, 'Bildatlas der Farn-und Bluetenpflancen Deutcshlad' (2000) (a wonderful work) both descriptions and pictures of V.austriaca ssp austriaca and V.austriaca ssp. jacquinii evidently differ (at least for me, an amateur). V.austriaca ssp.austriaca has oblanceolate to oblong leaves, 3 to 10 times longer than wide, leaf margin being from not toothed at all (sterile stalks only) to sparsely narrow dentate. Compare this with my pictures. Of cause, it may be that even such a difference is not decisive if one is sufficiently broad in defining taxa. Anyway, this goes beyond my knowledge, but the important remains - the plant was very beautiful and I was very happy when I found it. Thank you again and Warmest regards Amadej
According to the standard checklist of the German flora which defines the nomenclature used in the "Bildatlas" cited above [Wisskirchen, R.; Haeupler, H.; Standardliste der Farn- und Blütenpflanzen Deutschlands, Ulmer Verlag, Stuttgart (1998)] Veronica austriaca and Veronica jaquinii are frequently assumed do be different species and there are a number of morphological reasons for this assumption. Nevertheless there are some intermediates which are difficult to assign to the proper taxon. Therefore the author who was in charge of the genus Veronica for the checklist (Dr. E. Fischer, Bonn) decided to assign only subspecies level to Veronica austriaca ssp. austriaca and to V. austriaca ssp. jacquinii. My translation is not at all accurate but I hope that I could translate the meaning of the remark in the checklist.
Thank you Robert! Apparently a 'difficult' species. Nevertheless, I believe that if I call it Veronica jacquinii (as it is called in Slovenian plant determination key) I am not making a coarse mistake. Warmest regards Amadej
