Hi Rob

Mike gave me a nudge on this one a few days ago and I have started to look into it. It doesn't seem to be a clear cut case though (as always seems the case with higher-level plant taxonomy!) but I will see what we can do with it :)

Best wishes,
Chris R.

Hopefully this has now been fixed - at least it appears to have been on the UKSI browser on the NHM website.

I thought that I might just throw in my two-penny worth as higher-level taxonomy has, over the years, given me not a few headaches. The problem is that systematists have fun creating their own interpretations of higher groupings so, for a  given group, there may be alternate classifications in use (and the preferred one may depend on which country of continent that you work in!). Molecular studies can also lead to (sometimes quite drastic) revisions.

The approach that I adopted was to stick to a fairly conservative (traditional - even "old-fashioned") classification but declare this as a "management classification" which at least provided some stability, whilst not pretending to necessarily reflect the latest research.

At least we have improved on the original two-kingdom classification!

NBN Species Dictionary Project Manager (Retired!)