Abstract The proposal by Wan & al. intended to maintain maximal nomenclatural stability by proposing to conserve Selaginella (Selaginellaceae) with a conserved type, regardless of how and when Selaginella is to be split into several or more genera, as has already been done in some recent studies. Valdespino & al. do not seem to have understood the nomenclatural benefit of the Wan & al. proposal and mix up this proposal with the classification by Zhou & Zhang. In addition, their rebuttal paper appears to contain a number of issues. We respectably urge the Nomenclature Committee and the botanical community to reject their rebuttal and make a decision that will benefit long‐term nomenclatural stability in Selaginellaceae.

SummaryThis paper delves into the intricacies of botanical nomenclature, specifically focusing on the interpretation and application of Art. 20.2 of the International Code of Nomenclature (ICN). It critically analyzes the case of Delicata Krammer, against the backdrop of Art. 20.2. The investigation shows that Delicata does not coincide with any established Latin technical term used in morphology and hence fulfills the ICN requirements, confirming its validity. This finding highlights the need for clearer guidelines in distinguishing descriptive Latin terms from technical terms used in morphology. This paper contributes to the ongoing discourse in botanical taxonomy by advocating for revised practices and interpretations of nomenclatural rules, ensuring stability and precision in the naming of taxa.

Abstract Mountains form a diverse mosaic of microhabitats over small distances created by changes in climate, soil, and water availability. A key to adaptation of plants to such microhabitats is genetic variation; however, natural accumulation of genetic variation through mutation is slow and often not sufficient alone. Adaptive introgression via hybridization is an alternative to generate genetic variation. Here, we investigate hybridization and discuss its adaptive role in Veronica subg. Pseudolysimachium at their Altai Mountains distribution. To support our hypotheses of frequent hybridization, we genotyped thousands of SNPs for 233 individuals from 10 species and 7 putative hybrids previously described based on morphology. We employed Bayesian and likelihood statistical models and supported our results by morphometric analysis and genomic in situ hybridization (GISH). The results suggest that almost all the individuals of the putative hybrids are of F1 type. The GISH investigation in one case strongly supports homoploid hybridization (origin of V. ×schmakovii from V. longifolia and V. porphyriana. Divergence times of Altai Veronica species are estimated to be within 1–2 million years ago with high probability of gene flow over that time. Our results also demonstrate that the direction of gene flow is mainly from the locally endemic V. porphyriana. We hypothesize that the large Siberian plains and topographically diverse foreland of the Altai Mountains provide an ideal setting for hybridization with the potential for adaptive introgression of alleles conferring tolerance to cooler climates, to the lowland species migrating into the Altai Mountains.

Abstract The lack of a robust phylogenetic backbone has posed significant challenges to proposing an infrageneric taxonomic classification of the pear genus,Pyrus, a widely distributed Eurasian lineage of Rosaceae. This issue has been exacerbated by limited informative loci and inaccessible taxon sampling. To address these limitations, we conducted extensive taxon sampling, encompassing 78Pyrusingroup individuals representing 32 species, along with 4 outgroup species. This comprehensive sampling strategy covers a wide range of morphological and geographical variations. To enable accurate phylogenomic inference, we assembled 801 single‐copy nuclear genes and 72 plastid coding sequences from deep genome skimming (DGS) data. Additionally, we employed a tree‐based method for nuclear orthology inference, which led to the generation of three orthologous datasets: one‐to‐one orthologs (1to1), monophyletic outgroups (MO), and rooted ingroups (RT). The results yielded from both nuclear and plastid analyses consistently support the monophyly ofPyrus, and two well‐supported clades, the Occidental and Oriental clades, were recovered in nine nuclear and three plastid trees. Integrating evidence from morphology and phylogenomics, we propose an updated infrageneric classification ofPyrus, which consists of two subgenera:P. subg.PyrusandP. subg.Pashiastat. nov. This revised classification provides a more robust framework for understanding the evolutionary relationships within the pear genus.

Fig. 4. Distribution map showing a single locality of Cereus gerardi (star) in northern Brazil and a red rectangle showing the distribution area of C. ingens in eastern Brazil, detail to the right (circles).