Generic classification of amaryllidaceae tribe hippeastreae

A robust generic classification for Amaryllidaceae has remained elusive mainly due to the lack of unequivocal diagnostic characters, a consequence of highly canalized variation and a deeply reticulated evolutionary history. A consensus classification is proposed here, based on recent molecular phylogenetic studies, morphological and cytogenetic variation, and accounting for secondary criteria of classification, such as nomenclatural stability. Using the latest sutribal classification of Hippeastreae (Hippeastrinae and Traubiinae) as a foundation, we propose the recognition of six genera, namely Eremolirion gen. nov., Hippeastrum, Phycella s.l., Rhodolirium s.str., Traubia, and Zephyranthes s.l. A subgeneric classification is suggested for Hippeastrum and Zephyranthes to denote putative subclades. In Hippeastrum, we recognize H. subg. Hippeastrum and H. subg. Tocantinia. In Zephyranthes, Z. subg. Eithea, Z. subg. Habranthus, Z. subg. Myostemma (= core Rhodophiala clade), Z. subg. Neorhodophiala subg. nov., and Z. subg. Zephyranthes are recognized. Descriptions, synonymy, taxonomic keys, and new combinations are provided for each genus and subgenus683481498classification; herb; ; nomenclature; phylogenetics; phytogeography; taxonomy; ; Asparagales; Habranthus; Hippeastrum; Magnoliophyta; Phycella; Rhodophiala; ;We thank the curators of the following herbaria where various Hippeastreae specimens have been consulted by the authors of this article: B, BA, BAA, BM, BR, CONC, CORD, CTES, FLAS, K, LIL, LP, LZ, MCNS, MO, NY, P, PR, SGO, SI, SPF, UEC, W, Z. We are also very grateful to John McNeill for his help with nomenclatural doubts. This research was supported by NSF Doctoral Dissertation Improvement grant DEB-1310839 to PSS and NG, and Conicyt-Fondecyt (Chile) Iniciación Grant nº 11170977 to N