How did Sedirea end up renamed Phalaenopsis?

[AnonYMouse]

A more general question:

All this still has to be peer reviewed, right?

Even with incontrovertible data (and I'm not sure at what level of genetic analysis that is)?

All the recent reclassifying is based on genetic data?

And who decides where the lump/split cut off is (is it a consensus thing)?

[naoki]

Originally Posted by AnonYMouse

A more general question:
All this still has to be peer reviewed, right?

Do you mean for new description or reclassification? Actually, in either case, peer-review can add more credentials, but it is not required.

Originally Posted by AnonYMouse

Even with incontrovertible data (and I'm not sure at what level of genetic analysis that is)?

All the recent reclassifying is based on genetic data?

Molecular systematics is one of the main force in improving our understandings. However, as the name "systematics" indicates, researchers use entire data set to provide support/rejection to taxonomic hypotheses.

Originally Posted by AnonYMouse

And who decides where the lump/split cut off is (is it a consensus thing)?

Ideally, individual person decides it based on the available data. There is no single authority who dictates the scientific decision. It is a decentralized system, but we hope that the consensus appears. But I would say that it is not a completely objective system, classification could be somewhat arbitrary. If one influential researcher, who is the expert with the particular genus, makes a conclusion, many people follow his/her lead without critically evaluating the evidences.