Pteridaceae E.D.M.Kirchn.
Pteris semipinnata L. , nom. cons., scientific
Linnaeus, C. (1 May 1753), Species Plantarum 2: 1076 [tax. nov.]
Kramer, K.U. & McCarthy, P.M. in McCarthy, P.M. (ed.) (1998), Pteridaceae. Flora of Australia 48: 246, Map 216 APC [secondary reference]
  • APC Dist.: Qld (doubtfully naturalised)
Mazumdar, J. (2015), (2385) Proposal to conserve the name Pteris sempinnata (Pteridaceae) with a conserved type. Taxon 64(5): 1055 [secondary reference]
  • Text: "China. Canton, Gröndahl ex Herb. Casströmii (S No. S-P-5847), typ. cons. prop."
Applequist, W.L. (April 2017), Report of the Nomenclature Committee for Vascular Plants: 69. Taxon 66(2): 503 [secondary reference]
  • Text: "(2385) To conserve Pteris semipinnata L. (Pteridaceae) with a conserved type. ... Votes: 6–10–2 (neither recommended nor rejected). ... competing proposals"
  • Text: "(2386) To reject Pteris semipinnata L. (Pteridaceae). ... Votes: 7-8-3 (neither recommended nor rejected)."
Wilson, K.L. (August 2017), Report of the General Committee: 19. Taxon 66(4): 980 [secondary reference]
  • Text: "Proposals (2385) and (2386) were different ways to deal with the application of the name Pteris semipinnata, and the NCVP were divided on how to deal with them. After discussion, the GC first voted in principle (i) that we wished to find a solution that avoided adopting the name Pteris semipinnata as currently typified (19–3–1–0), and (ii) that resolving the application of the name by conservation would be preferable to rejection (16–5–2–0). The GC then formally voted (22–1–0–0) to accept Prop. (2385) cons. Pteris semipinnata (typ. cons.), i.e., the name is conserved as indicated; Prop. (2386) rej. Pteris semipinnata is, thereby, rejected."
Field, A.R. (2 January 2020), Classification and typification of Australian lycophytes and ferns based on Pteridophyte Phylogeny Group classification PPG I. Australian Systematic Botany 33(1): 42 [secondary reference]