From Wikispecies
Latest comment: 7 years ago by Andyboorman
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This genus is best treated in synonymy with Persea s.l. (van der Werff, 2001), even though it is suggested by Rohwer et al., 2009 that it should be segregated. The morphological differences are minor and the molecular evidence is not definitive. Its segregation does not help with the monophyly of Persea. In addition, quoting Li et al., 2011 "Persea subg. Eriodaphne could, according to their results (Rohwer et al., 2009), be treated as a separate genus, which probably would also include the Macaronesian Persea indica (their suggestion that this genus would have to be called Mutisiopersea Kosterm., however, was erroneous; the oldest available name for this group is Farnesia Heist. ex Fabr.)." Andyboorman (talk) 19:26, 1 October 2016 (UTC)Reply