Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a2398f0feb548682

Jump to content

Talk:Phryma

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 3 years ago by Peter coxhead in topic Photo

Taxonomy

[edit]

It's premature to say that Phryma leptostachya occurs only in North America. First, most references still treat Phryma as consisting of a single species (P. leptostachya), often with two subspecies (P. leptostachya subsp. leptostachya in North America, P. leptostachya subsp. asiatica in Asia). The new treatment is a very recent minority view that has not been fully evaluated. More importantly, the fact that Japanese populations have been segregated as the (resurrected) species P. nana and P. oblongifolia does not mean that P. leptostachya does not occur in Asia. These authors examined Japanese populations almost exclusively; they examined a single specimen from China, and none from India, Korea, or Russia. It's unclear whether the names of the Japanese taxa can be applied to any of the continental (i.e., non-Japanese) Asian populations of Phryma. Most critically, they did not address the name P. esquirolii, based on Chinese material, which has long been synonymized under P. leptostachya (or subsp. asiatica) but is older than, and thus has nomenclatural priority over, both P. nana and P. oblongifolia. 71.114.90.151 (talk) 23:30, 2 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

These seem very sound points, but the change to the article is not sourced, so appears to be WP:OR. Peter coxhead (talk) 05:46, 6 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

Photo

[edit]

The photo in the taxobox is not Phryma leptostachya. Not sure what it is, but it's not even family Phrymaceae. 98.192.193.83 (talk) 19:44, 5 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

I agree; it appears to be a member of the family Fabaceae. Replaced. Peter coxhead (talk) 05:47, 6 August 2022 (UTC)Reply