I'm not any sort of expert on taxonomy, however as a starting point see https://vicflora.rbg.vic.gov.au/flora/taxon/4f3d1532-8467-4836-a12a-0767689d3a1d. From this I understand that Pleurosorus was a segregate genus of Asplenium but that associated species are now in Asplenium again. Plus that the species distinction re glands on hairs is so variable that it is not deemed a valid distinction. I'll leave it with you, however, we definitely only want to have one scientific name for a species!
Again we fall foul of taxonomists not have enough funding for field trips, so they start reclassifying species. Does anyone else have a view on the correct name? For the moment I'd suggest sticking with the simplest.
From what I can find there isn't an Australia wide concensus, the ACT records both P.rutifolius and P.subglandulosus in the Cencus of Vascular plants. But Victoria certainly seems to regard the two as the same, see https://www.publish.csiro.au/sb/sb14043 , which is on the phylogeny of Australasian Aspleniaceae.
I think Rosemary would be a good person to pass this over to.
Describe how you intend to use these images and/or audio files and your request will be sent to the author for consideration.
Your request has been successfully submitted to the author for consideration.
2,166,917 sightings of 20,573 species in 6,800 locations from 11,955 contributors
CCA 3.0 | privacy
We acknowledge the Traditional Owners of this land and acknowledge their continuing connection to their culture. We pay our respects to their Elders past and present.