Kalanchoe sect. Stellatopilosae (A.Berger), Smith, 2020

Smith, Gideon F., 2023, A review of the infrageneric classifications proposed for Kalanchoe (Crassulaceae subfam. Kalanchooideae) from the earliest times up to 2000, Phytotaxa 619 (1), pp. 1-38 : 20

Kalanchoe sect. Stellatopilosae (A.Berger) Smith (2020c: 234).

Basionym:— Kalanchoe [unranked] Stellatopilosae Berger (1930: 404).

Type:— Kalanchoe tomentosa Baker (1882: 110) , designated by Smith (2020b: 52).

Infrasubgeneric designation not validly published:—“ Kalanchoe [subg. Kalanchoe ] sect. Stellatopilosae ” ( Berger 1930: 404) Maire (1977: 253), nom. inval., ( Turland et al. 2018: Art. 41.5).

Thirdly, Maire (1977: 254) treated “ Kalanchoe sect. Crenatae ” Berger (1930: 405) as if validly published by Berger (1930). However, Berger (1930: 404) did not publish “ Kalanchoe [unranked] Crenatae ” at the rank of section. In addition, this designation was not validly published by Berger because it includes K. laciniata (see Maire 1977: 258), the type of the genus Kalanchoe ( Turland et al. 2018: Art. 22.1), as was in fact recorded by Maire (1977: 251) himself.

This sectional designation proposed by Maire (1977: 254) should not be cited as “ Kalanchoe sect. Crenatae ” ( Berger 1930: 405) Maire (1977: 258), nom. inval., because the proposed basionym, “ Kalanchoe [unranked] Crenatae ” Berger (1930: 405), was, itself, not validly published ( Table 9 , row IB). A basionym is a legitimate name ( Turland et al. 2018: Art. 6.10) that, by definition, was validly published ( Turland et al. 2018: 198, Glossary). A name that was not validly published has no status under Turland et al. (2018: Art. 12.1) (see Smith 2020c: 234 for a discussion).

At the rank of section the correct citation of the autonymic section that includes the type of the genus Kalanchoe is: