Talk:Hylocereus
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Taxonomy Section
[edit]Are we just using sentence fragments for wikipedia now? I would change it, but I'm not exactly sure what the author intended. Especially with the phrase "Besides..." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.165.210.64 (talk) 03:22, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
- Now re-written. Peter coxhead (talk) 15:31, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
A molecular phylogenetic study published in 2017 puts Hylocereus into Selenicereus, with all the species moved to that genus. Peter coxhead (talk) 17:27, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
Synonym
[edit]Shouldn't this page be only a redirect to Selenicereus? Ilmionome (talk) 20:37, 4 March 2025 (UTC)
- There are some taxa that are of sufficient historical importance that we have articles on them – without a taxobox. If you go through the taxonomic databases in the taxon bar, several major ones still accept this genus (or at least don't give Selenicereus as the preferred name) including USDA PLANTS, APD, ITIS, and NCBI. And of course FoNA and FoC use Hylocereus because of their date. So I believe this genus does qualify for "historically recognized" status. (See, as other examples, Azalea, Lycopersicon, and Polianthes.) Peter coxhead (talk) 21:27, 4 March 2025 (UTC)