Đang chuẩn bị nút TẢI XUỐNG, xin hãy chờ
Tải xuống
In a taxonomic revision of the genus Quercus L. in Iran, 25 taxa named by Djavanchir Khoie in 1967 were studied and evaluated. These taxa were described in his PhD thesis but not validly published according to Arts. 30.8. and 40.1. of the ICN. | Turkish Journal of Botany http://journals.tubitak.gov.tr/botany/ Research Note Turk J Bot (2018) 42: 662-671 © TÜBİTAK doi:10.3906/bot-1710-11 Validation of the Quercus (Fagaceae) taxa described by Djavanchir Khoie Parisa PANAHI* , Ziba JAMZAD Botany Research Division, Research Institute of Forests and Rangelands, Agricultural Research, Education, and Extension Organization, AREEO, Tehran, Iran Received: 04.10.2017 Accepted/Published Online: 29.05.2018 Final Version: 26.09.2018 Abstract: In a taxonomic revision of the genus Quercus L. in Iran, 25 taxa named by Djavanchir Khoie in 1967 were studied and evaluated. These taxa were described in his PhD thesis but not validly published according to Arts. 30.8. and 40.1. of the ICN. According to our studies, seven of them are accepted taxa. In this paper we validate them. The original descriptions are provided, an identification key for these taxa is presented, and the types are designated in MPU. Key words: Hyrcanian forests, Iran, oak, validation, Zagros forests 1. Introduction Oak species grow abundantly in forests of the west, northwest, and north of Iran, displaying remarkable morphological variation. Several taxonomic groups of oaks are very complex and caused controversy in different authors’ taxonomic treatments. The most comprehensive study of the genus Quercus L. in Iran was carried out by Djavanchir Khoie in 1967, who described 25 taxa from Iran. These species were mostly considered in the synonym list in the subsequent authors’ treatments, i.e. Menitsky (1971). Reviewing the genus Quercus in Iran using micromorphological features (Panahi et al., 2011, 2012a, 2012b, 2012c, 2012d), we evaluated the named Quercus taxa. Seven out of 25 of Djavanchir Khoie’s names proved to be independent taxa with their own diagnostic characters, but the remaining ones were recognized as synonymies of other accepted species. The taxa described by Djavanchir Khoie in his PhD thesis were not validly published according to .
