Talk:Agavoideae

A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

Untitled[edit]

Genus Eremocrinum is not included on this list. Can anyone say if this is because of a controvery about its inclusion or about the integrity of the genus itself? NaySay 16:27, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If only we had Eremocrinum to explain... :-) The genus seems well-attested by external sources such as FNA, but placed in Liliaceae, while Wikispecies seems to use Lohmueller's page that puts it in Anthericaceae and then includes that in Agavaceae. The genus should probably be mentioned in both family articles so it can be found. Stan 14:03, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I checked the Flora of North America volume, which I believe follows the Cronquist system (thus Liliaceae s.l.) and in the introduction they provide an alternate classification placing the various genera of Liliaceae s.l. in various segregate families that have been recognized more recently, with Eremocrinum in Anthericaceae (which I guess places it in Agavaceae in the APG II system?). I've added it to the genus list. MrDarwin 14:58, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agavaceae[edit]

It's a bit aggravating that "Agavaceae" redirects to this page. APG III is one classifification, widely but not universally accepted, and the concept of Agavaceae still exists and is still accepted by some taxonomists. It would be useful to have a separate article on Agavaceae, as a historic and/or alternative classification, including its circumscription (which is not necessarily the same as Agavoideae), who still accepts it as a family and why, as well as why it is rolled into Asparagaceae by APG III (a family circumscription which I must stress has not been universally accepted or adopted!) 160.111.254.17 (talk) 15:34, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]