Talk:List of Arecaceae genera

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Plants Low‑importance

	Plants portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of plants and botany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PlantsWikipedia:WikiProject PlantsTemplate:WikiProject Plantsplant articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

Unless the genera can be arranged alphabetically within each tribe, this listing has limited value - Marshman 03:35, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I have reorganized the list by subfamily according to Uhl and Dransfield (1987) and have added some new species. SCHZMO ✍ 15:06, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think that it would be more useful a list of all genera arranged alphabetically. Since some genera aren't listed here, like Voanioala. Berton 17:08, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hemithrinax

Since theres a hemithrinax genus page I didnt delete it from the list but this is a probable syn. of thrinax and may need to be removed, as well as the genus article.Mmcknight4 07:44, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Changes

I've nixed a subfamily and moved a couple tribes around per several studies which I couldn't access completely but which seem to corroborate one another. Excerpts:

"The phylogeny supported a new circumscription for the subfamily Coryphoideae, including all taxa previously recognized in Coryphoideae with the addition of the tribe Caryoteae, formerly of the subfamily Arecoideae."
"The Ceroxyloideae is a small but heterogeneous subfamily of palms (Arecaceae, Palmae). It includes a Caribbean lineage (tribe Cyclospathae), a southern hemisphere disjunction (tribe Ceroxyleae), and an amphi-Andean element (tribe Phytelepheae), until recently considered a distinct subfamily (Phytelephantoideae) due to its highly derived morphology."
"Finally, the subfamily Arecoideae was modified to exclude the tribe Caryoteae and to include the tribe Hyophorbeae."

Mmcknight4 (talk) 21:39, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Update needed

A quite comprehensive classification is present in: Uhl NW & Dransfield J (1987) Genera Palmarum: A Classification of Palms Based on the Work of Harold E. Moore, Jr., Allen Press, Lawrence, Kansas, available online in Virtual Palm Encyclopedia, Palm & Cycad Societies of Florida. --Esculapio (talk) 09:18, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yes , update needed ! What a strange classification without any subtribe !? The link is gone.... do you have a new one? RuB (talk) 08:34, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

1987 is much, much too old for a classification, since it's well before the "molecular phylogenetics" era. The use of molecular methods has radically changed many classifications. Peter coxhead (talk) 11:42, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Better to see A New Phylogenetic Classification of the Palm Family (2006) ^[1]. And especially the last one Beyond Genera Palmarum: progress and prospects in palm systematics (2016) ^[2] RuB (talk) 14:46, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

However, we need to see this classification used by at least one secondary source, e.g. a taxonomic database, before we can use it. Peter coxhead (talk) 20:20, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have just updated the list according to Beyond Genera Palmarum (2016). Spindlefolia (talk) 00:55, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ John Dransfield; Natalie W. Uhl; Conny B. Asmussen; William J. Baker (2005). "A New Phylogenetic Classification of the Palm Family, Arecaceae". Kew Bulletin. 60 .4: 559–69. JSTOR 25070242.
^ Baker, William J.; Dransfield, John (2016). "Beyond Genera Palmarum: progress and prospects in palm systematics". Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society. 182 (2): 207–233. doi:10.1111/boj.12401.

Article updated

The previous version was completedly uncited but was obviously based off Genera Palmarum (2008). The current version, which I have updated, is cleaned up and includes more detailed information form Genera Palmarum (2008). Genera Palmarum is generally considered by specialists in palm botany to be the authority on palm genera taxonomy, with the latest updated edition being the 2008 one (there is also a 2014 reprint, but it is the same as the 2008 edition). There is no need for all subsections for each tribe, so I have removed those. I have also added Lanonia, Saribus, and the monotypic genera Jailoloa, Wallaceodoxa, Manjekia, and Sabinaria, per Baker & Dransfield (2016), which are not in Genera Palmarum (2008) since they were all described after 2008. Genera Palmarum (2008) has a total of 183 genera, but Baker & Dransfield (2016) has revised the number to be 181. Spindlefolia (talk) 00:52, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The previous version had Atitara, but this was not in Genera Palmarum (2008). Also, I'm not sure about the genus Calospatha. Per Baker & Dransfield (2016), genera that have been deprecated since Genera Palmarum (2008) are as follows. Spindlefolia (talk) 02:20, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

PoWO as of March 2024 has:

Ceratolobus = syn. of Calamus Y re-written as historically recognized genus
Daemonorops = syn. of Calamus Y re-written as historically recognized genus
Pogonotium = syn. of Calamus Y made a redirect
Retispatha = syn. of Calamus Y made a redirect
Pritchardiopsis = syn. of Saribus Y
Wallichia = accepted Y article fixed
Lytocaryum = syn. of Syagrus Y
Solfia = syn. of Balaka Y

Peter coxhead (talk) 06:56, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[Dransfield2005-1] John Dransfield; Natalie W. Uhl; Conny B. Asmussen; William J. Baker (2005). "A New Phylogenetic Classification of the Palm Family, Arecaceae". Kew Bulletin. 60 .4: 559–69. JSTOR 25070242.

[BeyondGP2-2] Baker, William J.; Dransfield, John (2016). "Beyond Genera Palmarum: progress and prospects in palm systematics". Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society. 182 (2): 207–233. doi:10.1111/boj.12401.

[1]

[2]