 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
The material on classification of Rosoideae would be best removed; the paper cited has been misinterpreted, and does not give a classification of Rosoideae - it is a study of a sample of taxa in Rosoideae, principally in the tribes Sanguisorbeae and Potentilleae, and does not cover the whole of the subfamily. The paper does include some discussion of the placement of taxa not included in the classification incorporated in WikiPedia.
Of the 4 subfamilies given in the Rosaceae page, Prunoideae and Maloideae seem to be valid (it seems most convenient to extend their boundaries slightly to include genera phylogenetically close to the traditional subfamilies, but not showing the diagnostic characters of the traditional subfamilies). Spiraeoideae seems to be polyphyletic, and Rosoideae might well be paraphyletic.
Some cladograms of Roscaceae are present at
I haven't made the change, as it seems to be that it would be better to reverthe page, and then repeat the last couple of edits, rather than delete the material, and I'm leaving it to someone with a better understanding of WikiPedia's mechanics.
- Stewart R. Hinsley, www.malvaceae.info, www.meden.demon.co.uk
Start a discussion about improving the Rosoideae page
Talk pages are where people discuss how to make content on Wikipedia the best that it can be. You can use this page to start a discussion with others about how to improve the "Rosoideae" page.
