accepted name (2006):
?
The publication above seems to be the first on the two different subspecies of Paeonia rockii. It was published in 1993 as dissertation. It contains for subsp. lanceolata a latin diagnosis and the type. But - as well as later Hong Tao's publication, it refers to the entire publication of Haw & Lauener and not to the page where they describe Paeonia suffruticosa subsp. rockii.Is this now a nomen nudum?? Maybe people more trained in taxonomy can answer this question. To my amateur understanding this name has priority over the name linyanshanii one year later published by Hong Tao. But - why didn't any of the chinese publications of Hong Tao or Hong Deyuan refer to this??
mentioned in
Pei Yanlong, Zou Yuping & Yin Zhen: Preliminary report on RAPD analysis of Paeonia suffruticosa subsp. spontanea and P. rockii; in Zhiwu Fenlei Xuebao [Acta Phytotaxonomica Sinica], 33(4): Aug. 1995, pp. 350 - 356.
Acta Phytotaxonomica Sinica 33(4), 350—356 (1995)
Preliminary Report of RAPD Analysis in Paeonia suffruticosa subsp. spontanea and Paeonia rockii
Pei Yan-long, Zou Yu-ping, Yin Zhen, Wang Xiao-quan, Zhang Zhi-xian, Hong De-yuan
(Laboratory of Systematic & Evolutionary Botany, Institute of Botany, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100093)
Acta Phytotaxonomica Sinica 33(4), 350—356 (1995)
Abstract Ten different oligonucleotide primers of arbitrary sequence were used in Capillary and Air Thermocycler to amplify genomic total DNA of Paeoiaa suffruticosa subsp. spontanea and P. rockii isolated from several local populations in Shanxi, Shaanxi and Gansu provinces. Under the strictly standardized amplification condition for all the primers these primers yielded clear and reproducible bands corresponding to amplified products and separable by agarose gel electrophoresis. Among a total of 71 bands amplified, 16(22. 5%) were polymorphic in a single individual of P. suffruticosa subsp. spontanea, while among a total of 76 bands 21 (27. 6%) were polymophic in a single individual of P. rockii. On an average, the pairwise marker difference between band profiles of conspecific individuals (different populations) was 7. 9 for P. suffruticosa subsp. spontanea and 8. 7 for P. rockii respectively. The average marker difference between P. suffruticosa subsp. spontanea and P. rockii was 10. 3. Obviously, greater number of plants and primers will be required to detect satisfactorily level of genetic diversity. These preliminary results showed that intraspecific genetic diversity was low for the two endangered species. RAPD as a molecular marker was useful and feasible for detecting the genetic variation within species of wild moutans. And it was also potential for studying evolution and relationships between species.
Key words P. suffruticosa subsp. spontanea; P. rockii; genetic variation; RAPD
...
