This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Plants Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of plants and botany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PlantsWikipedia:WikiProject PlantsTemplate:WikiProject Plantsplant articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

This page has been proposed for deletion because it is not found on POWO or WFO.

However, there are entries on some Brazilian databases and WFO has a couple on unchecked items that may be related.

• SiBBr: Justicia genistiformis Nees
• REFLORA: Query Virtual Herbarium=By list, Scientific Name=Justicia genistiformis (10 specimens)
• WFO: Tyloglossa genistiformis Nees and Adhatoda genistiformis Nees

It's not a new species which POWO/WFO haven't got around to, as the specimens are from 1964 to 1997. I can't find anything on synonyms on POWO, WFO or World Plants, which you'd normally expect. —  Jts1882 | talk  08:48, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's in (as Tyloglossa) Martius's Flora Brasiliensis, so it goes a lot further back (1847 per IPNI). See also comments made on Tom Radulovich's talk page. Lavateraguy (talk) 12:23, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've deprodded for now. That MSc thesis certainly treats the species as valid, although I can't quite parse why they consider this name in particular to be applicable. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 16:37, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your research. So what do you think should be done with the article? It has been unreferenced since it was created in 2006, so we should remedy that. It could be 1) kept where it is with a referenced discussion of its current status, with Tyloglossa genistiformis listed as a synonym, 2) moved to Tyloglossa genistiformis, the unplaced name listed in POWO and WFO, and moved when a valid name is published, or 3) deleted, on the presumption that someone might write an article when it's a validly published species. Tom Radulovich (talk) 16:44, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The 2010 Catálogo de Plantas e fungos do brasil doesn't have this species under any of its names. But that predates the thesis. The more recent database has Ecbolium genistiforme as the correct name (according to POWO Ecbolium is restricted to the Old World), but has Ecbolium genistiforme, Tyloglossa genistiformis and Adhatoda genistiformis as "nome mal applicado". There may be disagreement among Brasilian botanists about this taxon, but I would have thought that one would be able to find someone placing it in synonymy with something else.

There's a "Chagas, E.C.O., Costa-Lima, J.L. 2020. Tyloglossa in Flora do Brasil 2020. Jardim Botânico do Rio de Janeiro. (https://floradobrasil2020.jbrj.gov.br/FB596304)", but hangs when I try to load it. Lavateraguy (talk) 22:32, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]