Reader Comments
Post a new comment on this article
Post Your Discussion Comment
Please follow our guidelines for comments and review our competing interests policy. Comments that do not conform to our guidelines will be promptly removed and the user account disabled. The following must be avoided:
- Remarks that could be interpreted as allegations of misconduct
- Unsupported assertions or statements
- Inflammatory or insulting language
Thank You!
Thank you for taking the time to flag this posting; we review flagged postings on a regular basis.
closeTaxonomic Clarification
Posted by AaronListon on 08 Sep 2013 at 01:00 GMT
The authors use the ambiguous abbreviation "P." for four genera of Rosaceae: Prinsepia, Prunus, Pyrus and Pentactina. It takes some detective work to discover that "P. rupicola" is the genus Pentactina, which never appears in the text or tables. The only place to find the genus name is in the phylogenetic tree figure, but without the species name, so the fact that P. rupicola refers to Pentactina rupicola is never stated. The literature cited is no help, since no citation is given for the Pentactina plastome. The sequence is actually unpublished, but available in Genbank as accession JQ041763, which should have been cited. Adding to the general taxonomic confusion, the species name, Pentactina rupicola, is mispelled as Pentactina rupicala in 2 places, while the species Pyrus pyrifolia is consistently mispelled as Pyrus pyfifolia, or Pyrus pyrifoliae in the citation.
RE: Taxonomic Clarification
AaronListon replied to AaronListon on 08 Sep 2013 at 01:18 GMT
I can't believe I forgot how to spell misspell. Next time I will follow the advise under "guidelines" and use a spell checker.