Issue
Knowl. Manag. Aquat. Ecosyst.
Number 424, 2023
Anthropogenic impact on freshwater habitats, communities and ecosystem functioning
Article Number 10
Number of page(s) 2
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/kmae/2023003
Published online 06 April 2023

© T. Van den Neucker and K. Scheers, Published by EDP Sciences 2023

Licence Creative CommonsThis is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License CC-BY-ND (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you may not distribute the modified material.

The authors discovered six taxonomic errors in Appendices A and B and one relevant taxonomic change after publication of the paper “Mislabelling may explain why some prohibited invasive aquatic plants are still being sold in Belgium” (Van den Neucker and Scheers, 2022):

  • Eichhornia crassipes (Mart.) Solms is a taxonomic synonym of Pontederia crassipes Mart. (Pellegrini et al., 2018; POWO, 2023; WFO, 2023).

  • Euphorbia palustre is a misspelling of Euphorbia palustris L.

  • Lychnis flos-cuculi L. is a taxonomic synonym of Silene flos-cuculi (L.) Greuter & Burdet (POWO, 2023; WFO, 2023).

  • Miscanthus zebrinus Nakai ex Matsumura is a taxonomic synonym of Miscanthus sinensis Andersson (POWO, 2023; WFO, 2023). However, plants labelled M. zebrinus were identified as the cultivar Miscanthus sinensis ‘Zebrinus', which is an accepted name according to the database of the Royal Horticultural Society (RHS, 2023).

  • Plants listed as Myriophyllum sp. and traded as M. brasiliensis were identified as the recently described species M. rubricaule van Valkenburg & Duistermaat (van Valkenburg et al., 2022).

  • Potentilla palustris (L.) Scop. is a taxonomic synonym of Comarum palustre L. (POWO, 2023; WFO, 2023).

  • The trade name Scirpus isolepsis was used by the retailers and plant producers for plants identified as Eleocharis intermedia J.A. Schultes.

Appendices A and B were corrected and are available as supplementary material. As indicated by Van den Neucker and Scheers (2022), discrepancies can occur between different botanical and horticultural resources used to validate plant names on labels provided by retailers and plant producers. Also, it should be taken into account that new taxonomic insights may lead to name changes in the future. Here, the species names are in accordance with Plants of the World Online (POWO, 2023) and World Flora Online (WFO, 2023). The cultivar name Miscanthus sinensis ‘Zebrinus' is accepted in the Royal Horticultural Society Plant Finder database (RHS, 2023). After the corrections in Appendices A and B, it was established that out of the 285 plant taxa offered for sale by the retailers surveyed in 2016–2017 and 2020, 160 taxa were wild type species and 52 were cultivars, instead of 161 wild type species and 51 cultivars mentioned on page 3 (Van den Neucker and Scheers, 2022). It was also established that 122 plant taxa (43%) were mislabelled, instead of the 118 plant taxa (41%) mentioned on page 4 (Van den Neucker and Scheers, 2022). This number does not include Pontederia crassipes, since Eichhornia crassipes was the accepted name for this species at the time of the 2016–2017 surveys and all retailers and plant producers used the latter name on their labels. None of the surveyed retailers sold P. crassipes during the follow-up surveys in 2020. 64 plant names were misspelled on the label, including the names with multiple taxonomic errors, instead of 63 mentioned on page 4 (Van den Neucker and Scheers, 2022). Excluding P. crassipes, 40 plant taxa (21 species, 17 cultivars and two hybrids) were labelled with a taxonomic synonym, instead of 38 plant taxa (19 species, 17 cultivars and two hybrids) mentioned on page 4 (Van den Neucker and Scheers, 2022). 21 taxa were labelled with trade names, instead of 20 mentioned on page 4 (Van den Neucker and Scheers, 2022).

The authors apologize for the taxonomic errors and state that this does not change the scientific conclusions of the paper in any way.

Supplementary Material

Appendix A. List of plants offered for sale by the surveyed retailers and the plant producers in 2016–2017 and in 2020. Plant families, taxon categories and confidence levels of identification are also given. Taxa of the Belgian Consensus and Communication Lists and the European Union List are indicated separately. *In 2020, surveys of retailers 2 and 3 were limited to submersed and floating plants and taxa of the Belgian Consensus and Communication Lists and the European List of Union Concern.

Appendix B. List of mislabelled plants encountered during the surveys of 2016–2017 and 2020. The erroneous names used on the labels are listed separately for each plant producer. The taxon categories, types of taxonomic errors and confidence levels of identification are also given. *Eichhornia crassipes was transferred to the genus Pontederia after the 2016-2017 surveys (Pellegrini et al., 2018) and was not offered for sale during the 2020 surveys.

Access here

Acknowledgements

We are indebted to Jesse Beyer and Johan van Valkenburg (NVWA) for the identification of Eleocharis intermedia.

References

Cite this article as: Van den Neucker T, Scheers K. 2023. Corrigendum to: Mislabelling may explain why some prohibited invasive aquatic plants are still being sold in Belgium Knowl. Manag. Aquat. Ecosyst., 424, 10.

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.