76,071 research outputs found
Acer sinopurpurascens W. C. Cheng
No full textAcer sinopurpurascens W.C.Cheng in Chien & Cheng (1931: 62). Type:— CHINA. Zhejiang [Chekiang]: Western Tian Mu Shan [Tienmu-shan], elev. 1200–1300 m, 23 April 1931, W. C. Cheng 2424 (PE00023445, lectotype designated by Lin et al. 2009; isolectotypes A00245405, CQNM0015724, IBSC0002074, K000640863, NAS00071819, PE00023443, PE00023446, PE00023448). Remaining syntypes: CHINA. Zhejiang: Western Tianmushan, elev. ca. 845, 16 August 1929, S. S. Chien 845 (A00050488, CQNM0015723, NAS00071817, NAS00071818, NY00337718, PE00023444, K000640862); elev. 1200–1300 m, 23 April 1931, W. C. Cheng 2429 (A00245404, IBSC0002073, K000640864, LBG00076624, PE00023447). Note: —In the protologue, Chien & Cheng (1931) designated three gatherings as types of flowering, staminate and pistillate, respectively. Lin et al. (2009) chose a duplicate of staminate at PE (00023445) as the lectotype. The isolectotypes and remaining syntypes are listed above.Published as part of Chen, Feng & He, Hai, 2022, The historical relics in Chongqing Natural History Museum: An annotated checklist of original materials for 37 names of Chinese seed plants, pp. 38-52 in Phytotaxa 530 (1) on page 46, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.530.1.3, http://zenodo.org/record/582393
Fagus chienii W. C. Cheng 1935
No full text<p> <i>Fagus chienii</i> W.C.Cheng (1935: 70).</p> <p> Type:— CHINA. Sichuan [Szechuan]: W. Pingwu Xian [Pingwu hsien], elev. ca. 1300 m, 17 August 1931, <i>W. C. Cheng 2903</i> (lectotype designated here, NAS00070338; isolectotypes A00033870, CQNM0017387, E00098603, IBSC0001170, K000832761, MICH1109337, NAS00070339, NY00248568, PE00022177, PE00022178, PE00022179, PE00022180, PE00022181, PE00022182, PE00022180, SYS00054972, US 00409518).</p> <p> <b>Note</b>:—In the protologue, Cheng indicated <i>W.C. Cheng 2903</i> as the type, but he did not specify the herbarium where the type is deposited. In searching in various herbaria, 18 duplicates were traced and all of them are syntypes since no holotype was designated under Art. 9.6 (Turland <i>et al</i>. 2018). Most duplicates bear cupules and the identification annotation of W. C. Cheng and are well preserved. NAS00070338 is designated here as the lectotype for the reason Cheng used to work in NAS. In the protologue, Cheng (1935) stated the locality of the type at a place near “Yao-erpa” in West of Pingwu Xian; however, none of the duplicates with a label bearing this locality, and it is also uncertain whether “Pingwuhsien” means the present Pingwu Town. For efforts to trace this type locality has not been successful, the identity of this tree species is still uncertain (e.g. Huang <i>et al</i>. 1999).</p>Published as part of <i>Chen, Feng & He, Hai, 2022, The historical relics in Chongqing Natural History Museum: An annotated checklist of original materials for 37 names of Chinese seed plants, pp. 38-52 in Phytotaxa 530 (1)</i> on page 40, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.530.1.3, <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/5823939">http://zenodo.org/record/5823939</a>
Litsea auriculata S. S. Chien & W. C. Cheng 1931
No full textLitsea auriculata S.S.Chien & W.C.Cheng (1931: 59). Type:— CHINA. Zhejiang [Chekiang]: Western Tian Mu Shan [W. Tien-mushan], elev. ca. 1100 m, 8 August 1929, S. S. Chien 601 (PE00028512, lectotype designated by Lin et al. 2016; isolectotypes A00041694, CQNM0015781, K000793089, NF2000700, NAS00070861, PE00028938, PE00434507). Remaining syntypes: CHINA. Zhejiang: Western Tian Mu Shan, elev. 800–1200 m, 17 April 1931, W. C. Cheng 2348 (A00041692, CQNM0015783, IBSC000227, K000793088, NF2000695, NY00355220, PE00028503, PE00028504, PE00028505, PE00028506) and W. C. Cheng 2349 (A00041693, CQNM0015784, IBSC0000229, K000793087, LBG00072037, NAS00070859, NAS00070860, NF2000694, NY00355221, PE00028508, PE00028509, PE00028510, PE00028511). Note:— In the protologue, Chien & Cheng (1931) designated S.S. Chien 601 (fruiting), W.C. Cheng 2348 (pistillate) and W.C. Cheng 2349 (staminate) deposited at the herbarium of Biological Laboratory of the Science Society of China as the type, and all of them are syntypes according to Art.9.6 (Turland et al. 2018). Lin et al. (2016) designated PE00028512 as the lectotype. The available isolectotypes and remaining syntypes are traced at the above listed herbaria.Published as part of Chen, Feng & He, Hai, 2022, The historical relics in Chongqing Natural History Museum: An annotated checklist of original materials for 37 names of Chinese seed plants, pp. 38-52 in Phytotaxa 530 (1) on page 42, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.530.1.3, http://zenodo.org/record/582393
[Portrait of Thomas C. Cheng and Thomas W. Tinsley]
No full textThomas C. Cheng (left) and Thomas W. Tinsley (right) standing together.All images created by or supplied to the Society of Invertebrate Pathology for use in publications and promotion. Content in Description field provided by text on verso or accompanying documentation
[Portrait of Thomas C. Cheng and Thomas W. Tinsley]
No full textThomas C. Cheng (left) and Thomas W. Tinsley (right) standing together.All images created by or supplied to the Society of Invertebrate Pathology for use in publications and promotion. Content in Description field provided by text on verso or accompanying documentation
Wikstroemia pilosa W. C. Cheng 1932
No full textWikstroemia pilosa W.C.Cheng (1932: 140). Type:— CHINA. Zhejiang [Chekiang]: Zhuji, Wai Chen [Hweichen] Village, 12 July 1932, W. C. Cheng 2479 (IBSC0205092, lectotype designated by Tsai 1956; isolectotypes CQNM0015773, NAS00071897, NAS00071898, PE00025556, PE00025557, PE00025558, PE00025559). Note —Although only one gathering was cited in the protologue (Cheng 1932), no herbarium was specified. Eight duplicates were traced and all of them are syntypes under Art. 9.6, but none of them have the accompanying illustration (fig. 6) in the protologue. Tsai (1956) inadvertently designated the sheets at IBSC as type [“ 模式标本 ”], although this specimen is in bad condition with a fragment of branch and an lithographic illustration of the duplicate PE00025559. The usage of the type is a correctable error under Art. 9.10 (Turland et al. 2018).Published as part of Chen, Feng & He, Hai, 2022, The historical relics in Chongqing Natural History Museum: An annotated checklist of original materials for 37 names of Chinese seed plants, pp. 38-52 in Phytotaxa 530 (1) on page 47, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.530.1.3, http://zenodo.org/record/582393
Taxus chienii W. C. Cheng
No full textTaxus chienii W.C.Cheng in Cheng & Chien (1934: 240). Type:— CHINA. Zhejiang [Chekiang]: Longquan, Maoshan, 7 October 1934, Y. Y. Ho 3166 (NAS00070071, lectotype first-step designated by Law 1947, second-step designated by Chen & Deng 2015; isolectotypes NAS00022503, NAS00024819, NAS00068361, PE00000080, SYS00000507). Remaining syntypes: CHINA. Zhejiang: Longquan, Maoshan, elev. ca. 1000 m, 14 May 1933, S. Chen 1384 (A00018684, IBSC0003234, NAS00070073, PE00000078, PE00000079, PE00000084, SYS00095336, S(S-C-2195), WUK0000141, WUK0000144); 14 May 1934, S. Chen 3024 (CQNM0000208, IBSC0003236, NF1005377, PE00000085, SYS00095335, S(S-C-2194)). Paratypes in CQNM: CHINA. Zhejiang, Longquan, Maoshan, elev. ca. 1000, 11 May 1934, S. Chen 3010 (CQNM0000206, CQNM0000207, IBSC0003235, NAS00070070, NAS00070072, PE00000089, SYS00095334). ≡ Pseudotaxus chienii (W.C.Cheng) W.C.Cheng (1947: 1). Note:— In the protologue, Cheng & Chien (1934) designated three gatherings as types of male cone, female cone and fruiting, respectively and all of them are syntypes according to Art. 9.6. Lin & Cao (2007) selected a duplicate of S. Chen 1384 at PE as the lectotype, which bears male cones. However, they overlooked that Law (1947) had indicated Y. Y. Ho 1633 as the type but did not specify the herbarium where the type is deposited. Law’s choice may be considered the first-step lectotipification. Under Art. 9.19, his choice must be followed and the choice of Lin & Cao is to be superseded. Chen & Deng (2015) further narrowed to a specimen (NAS00070071) as the lectotype under 9.17.Published as part of Chen, Feng & He, Hai, 2022, The historical relics in Chongqing Natural History Museum: An annotated checklist of original materials for 37 names of Chinese seed plants, pp. 38-52 in Phytotaxa 530 (1) on page 47, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.530.1.3, http://zenodo.org/record/582393
The Use of Modality in UK TV Electoral Debates.
No full textThis paper analyses the use of modality in political discourse, focusing on UK TV electoral debates. While much of research on the discourse of electoral campaigns has been carried out in the field of political communication, with attention devoted mostly to macro-categories such as topics and functions, a call has come from those quarters (Benoit 2000) for a more fine-grained analysis addressing how topics are constructed and functions are performed linguistically. The analysis of modality offers a chance in this direction.
Modality, concerned as it is with ‘the status of the proposition that describes an event’ (Palmer 2001: 1), or the “qualification of states of affairs” (Nuyts 2005) plays a crucial role in the discourse of electoral campaigns, where the establishing of consensus rests mainly on the capacity of constructing a certain representation of reality (what is) and of possible alternatives (what should be, what may be, what would be).
In light of the above this paper analyses the use of the modal verbs ‘can’ and ‘should’ in the 2010 TV debates, from a Computer-Assisted Discourse Analysis (CADS) perspective, looking for relations between formal and functional aspects. Results suggest a specialization of functions for the two modals taken into consideration. Can, expressing possibility with commissive value, is mostly used in moves extolling candidates’ own virtues, while should, generally occurring with its core meaning of subjective obligation, is used in attacks to the adversaries
Characterization of the complete chloroplast genome of Carya hunanensis W. C. Cheng & R. H. Chang
No full textCarya hunanensis W. C. Cheng & R. H. Chang is a tree of great economic importance in China. In this study, the complete chloroplast genome of C. hunanensis was determined and analyzed phylogenetically. The whole genome was determined to be 159,892 bp in length, presenting a typical quadripartite structure with a large single copy (LSC) region (89,466 bp), a small single copy (SSC) region (18,714 bp), and a pair of inverted repeat (IR) regions (25,856 bp each). There were 132 genes annotated in the genome, including 84 protein-coding genes, 40 tRNA genes, and eight rRNA genes. The overall GC content of C. hunanensis chloroplast genome was 36.24%. Phylogenetic analysis indicated that C. hunanensis was closely related to C. kweichowensis and Annamocarya sinensis
- …
