Talk:Rosaceae

Comment from 2006

Stevens observes that "Although Rosoideae and Pyroideae are well-supported clades, little can yet be said of larger patterns of relationship in the rest of the family".

The subfamily breakdown here does not yet include all the genera on the overview.

Many recent changes

There have been a lot of changes, particularly the Potter et al. paper from 2007 (see Wikipedia), and the 2011 change to the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, which specifies that the subfamily known variously as Maloideae, Pyroideae, and Spiraeoideae can only be correctly called Amygdaloideae. The changes are very great, and because there are no citations given here, I don't know what to do about the tribe names. I can, however, add a red link for the new subfamily: Dryadoideae. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 21:23, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

References and genera have now been added. Andyboorman (talk) 12:41, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow editors,

I have just modified 1 external links on Rosaceae. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/19970102053745/http://www.rbgkew.org.uk/cgi-bin/web.dbs/genlist.pl?ROSACEAE to http://www.rbgkew.org.uk/cgi-bin/web.dbs/genlist.pl?Rosaceae

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:39, 7 July 2017 (UTC)