You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
294 F. BARTOLUCCI ET AL.
Seseli pallasii Besser
Seseli peucedanoides (M.Bieb.) Koso-Pol.
E Seseli polyphyllum Ten.
Seseli praecox (Gamisans) Gamisans
Seseli tommasinii Rchb.f.
ET Seseli tortuosum L. subsp. maritimum (Guss.) C.Brullo, Brullo, Giusso & Sciandr.
Seseli tortuosum L. subsp. tortuosum
E Siculosciadium nebrodense (Guss.) C.Brullo, Brullo, S.R.Downie & Giusso
Silaum silaus (L.) Schinz & Thell.
Siler montanum Crantz subsp. garganicum (Ten.) Iamonico, Bartolucci & F.Conti
Siler montanum Crantz subsp. montanum
E Siler montanum Crantz subsp. siculum (Spreng.) Iamonico, Bartolucci & F.Conti Silphiodaucus prutenicus (L.) Spalik, Wojew., Banasiak, Piwczyński & Reduron
Sison amomum L.
Sison segetum L.
Sium latifolium L.
Smyrnium olusatrum L.
T Smyrnium perfoliatum L. subsp. dimartinoi (Raimondo, Mazzola & Spadaro) Stinca & Pignatti
Smyrnium perfoliatum L. subsp. perfoliatum
Smyrnium perfoliatum L. subsp. rotundifolium (Mill.) Bonnier & Layens
Thapsia asclepium L.
Thapsia garganica L. subsp. garganica
E Thapsia garganica L. subsp. messanensis (Guss.) Brullo, Guglielmo, Pasta, Pavone & Salmeri
Thapsia meoides (Desf.) Guss.
E Thapsia pelagica Brullo, Guglielmo, Pasta, Pavone & Salmeri
Thysselinum palustre (L.) Hoffm.
Tommasinia altissima (Mill.) Reduron
Tordylium apulum L.
Tordylium maximum L.
Tordylium officinale L.
Torilis africana Spreng.
Torilis arvensis (Huds.) Link subsp. arvensis
Torilis arvensis (Huds.) Link subsp. neglecta Thell.
Torilis elongata (Hoffmanns. & Link) Samp.
Torilis japonica (Houtt.) DC.
Torilis leptophylla (L.) Rchb.f.
E Torilis nemoralis (Brullo) Brullo & Giusso
Torilis nodosa (L.) Gaertn. subsp. nodosa
Torilis nodosa (L.) Gaertn. subsp. webbii (Jury) Kerguélen
Trinia dalechampii (Ten.) Janch.
Trinia glauca (L.) Dumort. subsp. carniolica (A.Kern. ex Janch.) H.Wolff
Trinia glauca (L.) Dumort. subsp. glauca
Trochiscanthes nodiflora (All.) W.D.J.Koch
Turgenia latifolia (L.) Hoffm.
E Visnaga crinita (Guss.) Giardina & Raimondo – Note: Possibly extinct in CAL (Peruzzi 2014).
Visnaga daucoides Gaertn.
Xanthoselinum venetum (Spreng.) Soldano & Banfi
Discussion
The native flora of Italy include 8195 specific and subspecific taxa.
It is the highest number in Europe and, at the Mediterranean
region level, only Turkey hosts a higher number of native plant
taxa (Boulos 1995; Güner et al. 2000; Valdés et al. 2002; Lauber
and Wagner 2007; Buttler and Hand 2008; Danihelka et al. 2012;
Güner et al. 2012; Aedo et al. 2013; Dimopoulos et al. 2013; Tison
and de Foucault 2014; Vangjeli 2015; Dimopoulos et al. 2016;
Raab-Straube et al. 2016; Aedo et al. 2017; Özhatay et al. 2017).
The Italian endemics (1708) correspond to 20,8% of the total
flora. The degree of endemism for Italy is comparable with most
of the European and Mediterranean floras, with the exception of
the Turkish flora, in which 34% of endemicity is reported (Aedo
et al. 2013; Özhatay et al. 2013; Rankou et al. 2013). Recently,
Peruzzi et al. (2014a) reported for Italy 1371 endemic taxa, then
updated to 1400 by Peruzzi et al. (2015b), but these authors
deliberately excluded the numerous subspecies within the taxonomically
critical genera Hieracium and Pilosella.
Although in recent years field explorations, regional floras
and taxonomic reviews regarding the Italian flora have been
increasingly published, for many taxa the distribution data are
lacking and/or show significant gaps of knowledge. In fact, 568
taxa have not been confirmed in recent times, 99 are doubtfully
occurring in Italy, 19 are data deficient and 430 are taxonomically
doubtful (not to mention hundreds of Hieracium subspecies).
There is clearly a need for further field and biosystematic
investigations to fill these gaps. Accordingly, the number of taxa
reported here is certainly not final and the taxonomic circumscription
of some critical genera will also require further in-depth
analyses. In particular, taxonomic studies should pay a special
attention to the correct interpretation and management of the
taxonomic rank of subspecies (Peruzzi and Bartolucci 2016). For
instance, there are several cases in the mostly apomictic genus
Hieracium, where field observation suggests the co-occurrence
in the same place of more than one putative “subspecies”. Similar
situations could apply to many other taxa where “subspecies” lack
a clear geographical (or at least ecological) structure. The classical
subspecies concept provided by Wilson and Brown (1953),
i.e. “the subspecies were conceived of as genetically distinct, geographically
isolated population belonging to the same species and
therefore interbreeding freely at the zones of contact”, is difficult
to apply when two or more subspecies share the same native