Talk:Solidago lateriflora

Synonymy problem in original databases
Also tagging because I know you'll just love to read this.

While reading this, pay special attention to the use of latifolia and lateriflora.

Plantdrew, If you think back a couple of months ago when I requested this disambiguation page for Solidago lateriflora, it was with the (rightful) understanding (based on databases) that there were two Solidago lateriflora that needed to be disambiguated.

This is not true. The databases lie.

There is a current problem. While using the data via IPNI, PoWO, GBIF, WFO, and Catalogue of Life, I have discovered that, yes, a Solidago lateriflora Raf. ex DC. is listed as one of the taxonomic synonyms of Solidago caesia L. However, this name, Solidago  lateriflora  with the "Raf. ex DC." authorship, does not and has never existed as a species (I probably shouln't say "never," but I feel pretty confident about that). It appears to be a database error that may have originated in World Plants data in or before 2017 and should have been Solidago  latifolia  (that ain't the half of it, though).

The primary source for this synonym of Solidago caesia given in World Plants is De Candolle's Prodr. 5: 335. This is viewable at BHL here, bottom of page, and clearly gives the species name as Solidago latifolia, referencing Linn., assuming Sp. Pl., and likely Ed. 2 or Ed. 3, as the page number is 1234 and Ed. 1 pages don't go up that high, here. As you can see in Sp. Pl. 2: 879 and in the one I link to, Linnaeus defined both an S. lateriflora (now basionym of Symphyotrichum lateriflorum) and S. latifolia (now synonym for Solidago flexicaulis L).

'If I actually understand nomenclature (can't say that I do), then there is no Solidago latifola'' Raf. ex DC. either, because that reference in Prodr. 5 cites Linnaeus 1234.''' Unless there's another reference where it does not, how it came into existence in databases, or possibly prior to that, is a question but kind of outside of the scope of this topic.

Anyway.... Problem at hand for Wikipedia: There is no (secondary) source for this synonym change because the databases I list above all rely on World Plants, where the error may have originated as early as 2017 (nothing wrong with World Plants, it's just that bad or good data start somewhere). I have contacted the administrator(s) of World Plants telling them at least that it should be latifolia and not lateriflora, because I believe that data filters to the other databases.

I went ahead and changed the synonym in the Speciesbox on the Solidago caesia Wiki page to at least have Solidago latifolia Raf. ex DC. (did you hear me say "ugh"?). There is no Wikipedia-desired secondary source for that right now (all the databases I list above are wrong), although because the secondary database sources do reference the primary source, and the primary source is accurate (although I'm not sure how it ended up as Raf. ex DC., like I said — I mean I totally understand what "Raf. ex DC." should mean - that this is Raf.'s protologue published in DC., but there is no new anything and it's not Raf.'s protologue, nor does he say it is, so Raf. shouldn't get to supercede L., and he did not do so in Prodr. 5), I could just primary that one synonym in the Speciesbox -- but it's wrong, so no, I really can't. Could just take it out, which would actually be less confusing for all people reading as long as they don't compare to the databases. Or even track down how it could have happened in the first place (except I'm nose-deep in working on Symphyotrichum lateriflorum to get it ready for GA review, so if anyone else wants to...).

Back to this DAB page. It is inaccurate. Technically, Solidago lateriflora should be a redirect to Symphyotrichum lateriflorum unless it is appropriate to put a statement on here that Solidago lateriflora Raf. ex DC. is really Solidago latifolia Raf. ex DC., a taxonomic synonym of Solidago caesia. (But, is it? I mean, really?) Regardless, Solidago latifolia at least for now will need a DAB page referencing S. flexicaulis and S. caesia depending on the authorship, although I don't understand how S. latifolia Raf. ex DC. exists in the first place (which I already said) unless it's a leftover before IAPT codes (or created by them). Eewilson out. —Eewilson (talk) 04:01, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

...I contacted Michael Hassler, keeper of World Plants, and he said he is going to remove the synonym because he can find no information regarding his original source of the information. I don't know how long that will take or when a changed synonym list for Solidago caesia will exist. Meantime, the Wikipedia problems that I describe above still stand. —Eewilson (talk) 13:21, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
 * There's a S. lateriflora Raf. listed in the entry for S. axillaris, which itself is a synonym of S. caesia. So I think all might be well? —Hyperik ⌜talk⌟ 21:21, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
 * You got a link? —Eewilson (talk) 21:27, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
 * This one. —Hyperik ⌜talk⌟ 21:47, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
 * "S. lateriflora Raf.! in litt." Do you know what the ! and in litt. mean? —Eewilson (talk) 21:59, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
 * You are of course correct, and I have made an idiot of myself. However, in my defense, the print is small and the copy is old and no normal human would have been able to read it and find that embedded synonym that quickly. :) I still would like to know what ! and in litt. mean, though. (I contacted Hassler and retracted my alarms.) —Eewilson (talk) 04:45, 22 December 2020 (UTC)