Maihueniopsis Speg. in Anales Soc. Ci. Argent. 99: 86. 1925 sec. Hunt 2016
  • =Puna R.Kiesling in Hickenia 1: 289. 1982 syn. sec. Hunt 2006
  • Maihueniopsis subg. Puna (R.Kiesling) Stuppy in Succ. Pl. Res. 6: 50. 2002 syn. sec. Hunt 2006



Griffith & Porter (2009) found Maihueniopsis polyphyletic based on a combined analysis of nuclear ITS and plastid trnL-F, but Ritz & al. (2012) found a monophyletic Maihueniopsis to be strongly supported by nuclear phyC and plastid trnK/matK. The reasons for these deviating results are discussed in detail by Ritz & al. (2012) and appear to result from peculiarities in the evolution of the ITS sequences used by Griffith & Porter that seem unsuitable to adequately represent phylogenetic relationships.A
A. Hernández-Ledesma, P., Berendsohn, W.G., Borsch, T., von Mering, S., Akhani, H., Arias, S., Castañeda-Noa, I., Eggli, U., Eriksson, R., Flores-Olvera, H., Fuentes-Bazán, S., Kadereit, G., Klak, C., Korotkova, N. & Nyffeler, R. 2015: A taxonomic backbone for the global synthesis of species diversity in the angiosperm order Caryophyllales. – Willdenowia 45(3): 281-383