What is <i>Cactus opuntia</i> today? Epitypification of the Linnaean name, originally based on highly heterogeneous original elements: An alternative to a proposal to conserve another name in use

Abstract The original material of the Linnaean name Cactus opuntia (currently Opuntia vulgaris , syn. subst./replacement name) represents more than one taxon. The name was lectotypified in 1981 with the illustration “Opuntia vulgo herbariorum” published by Bauhin and Cherler in 1650. However, the lectotype is demonstrably ambiguous, and the name cannot be applied to a single currently recognized taxon with certainty. This had previously led to consider the application of this name doubtful, and even led some to propose that O. vulgaris should be treated as a nomen ambiguum. Several subsequent proposals attempted to change the type of this name to an unambiguous element. However, these changes are contrary to the International Code of Nomenclature , because the illustration cited by Linnaeus in the protologue and selected as the lectotype is part of the protologue and therefore cannot be in serious conflict with it or be superseded. Depending on the interpretation of the lectotype, some authors have considered this name conspecific with O. monacantha , or even with O. humifusa (for both, the Linnaean name would take precedence), while in other cases, it has been interpreted as a synonym of O. ficus‐indica . Here, we discuss the name Cactus opuntia and propose a solution to conclusively fix the use of the Linnaean name and its concept. Accordingly, for the purpose of nomenclatural stability and to support the continued and well‐established use of the name O. vulgaris as a heterotypic synonym of O. ficus‐indica , we propose an epitype to fix the application of the name to an element that unambiguously represents the current concept and use of the name O. vulgaris . The epitype selected is a modern and well‐preserved specimen in the herbarium of the University of Florida (FLAS), with available molecular data. Finally, the type of the Linnaean name Cactus ficus‐indica (currently Opuntia ficus‐indica ) is also discussed.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Taxon
Published
2025-02-23
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/tax.13322
Primary Topic
Botanical Research and Applications
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

What is Cactus opuntia today? Epitypification of the Linnaean name, originally based on highly heterogeneous original elements: An alternative to a proposal to conserve another name in use

Raúl Ferrer‐Gallego, P. Pablo Ferrer‐Gallego
Taxon
Botanical Research and Applications
article

What is Cactus opuntia today? Epitypification of the Linnaean name, originally based on highly heterogeneous original elements: An alternative to a proposal to conserve another name in use

Raúl Ferrer‐Gallego, P. Pablo Ferrer‐Gallego
article en

Abstract

Abstract The original material of the Linnaean name Cactus opuntia (currently Opuntia vulgaris , syn. subst./replacement name) represents more than one taxon. The name was lectotypified in 1981 with the illustration “Opuntia vulgo herbariorum” published by Bauhin and Cherler in 1650. However, the lectotype is demonstrably ambiguous, and the name cannot be applied to a single currently recognized taxon with certainty. This had previously led to consider the application of this name doubtful, and even led some to propose that O. vulgaris should be treated as a nomen ambiguum. Several subsequent proposals attempted to change the type of this name to an unambiguous element. However, these changes are contrary to the International Code of Nomenclature , because the illustration cited by Linnaeus in the protologue and selected as the lectotype is part of the protologue and therefore cannot be in serious conflict with it or be superseded. Depending on the interpretation of the lectotype, some authors have considered this name conspecific with O. monacantha , or even with O. humifusa (for both, the Linnaean name would take precedence), while in other cases, it has been interpreted as a synonym of O. ficus‐indica . Here, we discuss the name Cactus opuntia and propose a solution to conclusively fix the use of the Linnaean name and its concept. Accordingly, for the purpose of nomenclatural stability and to support the continued and well‐established use of the name O. vulgaris as a heterotypic synonym of O. ficus‐indica , we propose an epitype to fix the application of the name to an element that unambiguously represents the current concept and use of the name O. vulgaris . The epitype selected is a modern and well‐preserved specimen in the herbarium of the University of Florida (FLAS), with available molecular data. Finally, the type of the Linnaean name Cactus ficus‐indica (currently Opuntia ficus‐indica ) is also discussed.

TaxonVol. 74(3)
Generalitat Valenciana (ES), Centre d'Investigacions sobre Desertificació (ES)
European Commission, Agencia Estatal de Investigación
Openalex Percentile: Top 95%
Botanical Research and Applications
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.