How many type specimens can be stored in old lesser-known herbaria with turbulent histories? – A Juncus case study reveals their importance in taxonomy and biodiversity research
Jarosław Proćków , Anna Faltyn-Parzymska , Paweł Jarzembowski , Małgorzata Proćków , Anna Jakubska-Busse
AbstractMany herbarium sets in Europe are still being catalogued and it is likely that many old-type collections are yet to be discovered. This research has the potential to facilitate the study of the biodiversity of many regions, especially regions for which collections are extremely scarce. This has been confirmed by a case study using Juncus (Juncaceae) examining the turbulent history of botanical collections at the WRSL herbarium and the evaluation of its importance to the study of taxonomy and biodiversity since 1821. The analysis revealed that the WRSL collection is rich in types (ca. 3.6%) and we identified 76 (of 78) new, historically and nomenclaturally important specimens (types, original material and so-called “topotypes”). Some of these type specimens represent duplicates of these that were stored in Berlin and destroyed during World War II. Many of the type specimens are from the United States of America, South Africa, India, and Canada. The largest number of Juncus type specimens stored at WRSL originate from South Africa (42.3% of all type specimens), even though Juncus is rare in Africa. Our study highlights that uncatalogued old collections that are under-explored and under-exploited have the potential to facilitate the discovery of specimens important for the study of biodiversity, conservation, taxonomy and nomenclature.
|Journal series||PhytoKeys, ISSN 1314-2011, e-ISSN 1314-2003, (N/A 100 pkt)|
|Publication size in sheets||1.25|
|Keywords in English||biodiversity, conservation, historical collections, Juncaceae, Juncus, plant taxonomy|
|License||Journal (articles only); published final; ; with publication|
|Score||= 100.0, 14-09-2020, ArticleFromJournal|
|Publication indicators||= 0; : 2017 = 1.13; : 2018 = 1.5 (2) - 2018=1.351 (5)|
* presented citation count is obtained through Internet information analysis and it is close to the number calculated by the Publish or Perish system.