{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.028132992327365727, 'fraction_numerical': 0.011935208866155157, 'mean_word_length': 4.989795918367347, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Cryptic species and taxonomic troubles: a rebuttal of the systematic treatment of the Asian ladies’ tresses orchids (Spiranthes species; Orchidaceae) by Pace et al. (2019)


 In a recent research article by Pace et al. (2019), the authors claimed to have used information from phenology, morphology and molecular phylogenetics in their nomenclatural review of the Spiranthes sinensis complex. However, there are several scientific and botanical nomenclature issues with the Pace et al. (2019) paper in addition to its many errors and misinformation, which can be severely misleading and have the potential to affect our understanding of the highly complex Asian Spiranthes group. Here, we compare and critique their study in light of our study published prior to the article in the Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society. We suggest that the authors should have resorted to improved and new molecular data and a truly integrative analysis to support: (1) re-circumscription of the S. sinensis species complex for each of the six species they recognized, and the treatment of S. hongkongensis as a hybrid; and (2) all the new synonymies they proposed for Asian Spiranthes.