物种编目是全球生物多样性研究的一个热点问题。完整的、可信度较高的名录的形成必须通过大地区和小地区之间从上而下、从下而上两个方向的几次反复才可能实现。作者收集、整理、比较了《中国植物志》、Flora of China和The Plant List三套数据中的裸子植物名录, 试图发现其中存在的问题, 并尝试提出一些解决方案。目前裸子植物编目主要存在以下问题: (1)名称拼写错误; (2)名称命名人错误和标准化问题; (3)名称文献规范化及相关的卷期页码和发表年代错误; (4)大小种概念的问题, 如: John Silba的小种问题; (5)名实问题。总结编目经验, 作者提出了如下针对性解决方案: (1)通过不同的志书或者名录之间的比较, 查漏补缺, 完善全球裸子植物名录; (2)发现问题, 重点关注不同的志书或名录之间记载不一致之处, 需要考证原始文献, 如文献名称、页码、发表年代、名称命名人等, 这些名录之间彼此还有互相校准的作用; (3)对分类特别混乱、问题特别多的类群, 如: 柏科的柏木属(Cupressus)、红豆杉科的红豆杉属(Taxus)、买麻藤科的买麻藤属(Gnetum)等, 需要开展分类学研究, 厘清问题, 并完善全球裸子植物编目。

The catalogue of global species is a primary focus of biodiversity science. A complete species checklist of gymnosperms is possible through repeated and mutual verification by comparing global checklists with regional and local checklists. To evaluate potential inconsistencies in the current catalogue of global gymnosperms (e.g., spelling, authorship, and original literature of scientific names), I compared species records from three gymnosperm species lists, including the Flora Reipublicae Popularis Sinicae (FRPS), Flora of China (FOC), and The Plant List (TPL). Errors included corresponding page number, publication year of the original naming literature, different opinions on species definitions (e.g. lumper vs. splitter) among authors, and mismatching species entities and their corresponding scientific names. To address these shortfalls, I propose measures like database development, comparison of different Floras and Checklists, and comparison of different species datasets. These actions would facilitate detection of missing names and/or literature as well as inconsistent records. The generally accepted taxonomic treatments will be adopted and the catalogue of problematic taxa will be corrected in a new taxonomic revision. This case study provides potential solutions to address problems that exist when attempting to catalogue global species diversity.