Othonna carnosa problems

[Terry S.]

O. carnosa grows wild in the Eastern Cape Province of SA. As such, it is in an area where the the winter rainfall system changes to summer rainfall. In practice this means that it can experience rain at most times of the year and is likely to be opportunistic in its growth pattern. I have never grown it, but it should be evergreen and not summer-deciduous as for the Western and Northern Cape species that I grow.

[Colin Walker]

Well guys, the taxonomy here has changed and I'm not entirely sure which species is being discussed since no pics have been posted for me to be certain of the ID.

So as a starter for 10 all the succulent-leaved species of Othonna are now in a new genus Crassothonna which includes around a dozen species.

The trailing non-caudiciform common othonna is now Crassothonna capensis.

The more collectable Othonna clavifolia is now Crassothonna clavifolia.

This leaves all the winter-growing caudiciform species in Othonna.

[Terry S.]

Othonna carnosa now seems to have ended up as Crassothonna cacalioides. This seems very curious as Othonna carnosa and O. cacalioides as described in Gordon's Succulent Compositae book are very different beasts. Also photos pertaining to be O. carnosa on the web are different to my concept of O./C. cacaliodes as I know it from the Western Cape.

[iann]

Othonna cacalioides is nothing like Othonna carnosa. The basionym for Crassothonna cacalioides is Cineraria cacalioides, so presumably it would have been Othonna cacalioides but the name was already taken by a different plant. There appears to be considerable confusion about these names out in t'internet-land.

O. cacalioides is a stubbornly summer-deciduous winter-grower (not sure if you'd call it geophytic or caudiciform).
July

November

I haven't grown O. carnosa/C.cacaliodes, so I'm only guessing about it not being much of a winter grower.

[Colin Walker]

Othonna carnosa now seems to have ended up as Crassothonna cacalioides. This seems very curious as Othonna carnosa and O. cacalioides as described in Gordon's Succulent Compositae book are very different beasts. Also photos pertaining to be O. carnosa on the web are different to my concept of O./C. cacaliodes as I know it from the Western Cape.

Terry, that's precisely why I said I'm not sure what plant is being talked about here and without a photo I'm rather in the dark.

So this new taxonomy and nomenclature is confusing. It all revolves around the earliest valid name for each species, which changes because of the new genus. The upshot is that there is now no such thing as Crassothonna carnosa.

The so called 'Little Pickles' which is the very familiar and common sprawling plant is now Crassothonna capensis but used to be Othonna capensis or the incorrect name Othonna crassifolia.

However Othonna carnosa is now Crassothonna cacalioides.

I'll try to dig out photos since I think I have pics of both.

[Colin Walker]

Here's the very common Crassothonna capensis.

I can't quickly find my photos of C. cacalioides. It's like C. capensis but the stems are shorter and the leaves are longer and more succulent.

This as Ian says is not the same as Othonna cacalioides which is a winter-growing caudiciform.

[MatDz]

I follow this discussion with an utmost amazement for how Othonna carnosa could have been "rebranded" to Crassothonna cacalioides, when Othonna cacalioides already exists. I know scientists care not about mortals, but this is asking for a (naming) disaster. Some people just like to watch the world burn

[Colin Walker]

Here is Crassothonna cacalioides (formerly Othonna carnosa). Sorry, not the best photo - colour not quite right!

As Ian's shown, a completely different plant to the winter-growing caudiciform Othonna cacalioides

[Colin Walker]

I follow this discussion with an utmost amazement for how Othonna carnosa could have been "rebranded" to Crassothonna cacalioides, when Othonna cacalioides already exists. I know scientists care not about mortals, but this is asking for a (naming) disaster. Some people just like to watch the world burn

Mat, I know this is confusing. The oldest valid name is what should be applied to a species, but this can change when the generic placement changes, as in this case. The same specific name can't be used for two different species in the same genus.

So Cineraria cacalioides became Othonna carnosa because there already was an Othonna cacalioides.

However in Crassothonna the name cacalioides could be used again.

The status of the name of the caudiciform Othonna cacalioides is unaffected by this.

So we've ended up with two species with the same specific epithet cacalioides but in two different genera.

Does that help?

[MatDz]

I follow this discussion with an utmost amazement for how Othonna carnosa could have been "rebranded" to Crassothonna cacalioides, when Othonna cacalioides already exists. I know scientists care not about mortals, but this is asking for a (naming) disaster. Some people just like to watch the world burn

Mat, I know this is confusing. The oldest valid name is what should be applied to a species, but this can change when the generic placement changes, as in this case. The same specific name can't be used for two different species in the same genus.

So Cineraria cacalioides became Othonna carnosa because there already was an Othonna cacalioides.

However in Crassothonna the name cacalioides could be used again.

The status of the name of the caudiciform Othonna cacalioides is unaffected by this.

So we've ended up with two species with the same specific epithet cacalioides but in two different genera.

Does that help?

I absolutely understand the "scientific why", just when splitting, merging and doing other reshuffles to a genus or two, especially when they are called so similarly as here, at least the same epithets shouldn't be used for the sake of sanity of a random C&S aficionado. But yes, it's all following the books

Also, this is quite a digression here, so please ignore me!