[3] Since the time of Bentham, the "premier systematic botanist of the nineteenth century",[5] considerable efforts have been made to classify and understand the striking morphological diversity in the Senecioneae.

[2] The traditional view of the tribe has been that of one huge genus Senecio plus many other genera which exhibit varying degrees of distinctiveness.

[5] Of the several potential causes for this constant redefinition the greatest is probably that little is known about its intergeneric relationships or a lack of phylogenetic understanding enhanced by the other problems of conflicting clues from morphological characters, the large size of the tribe, the absence of a precise delimitation or circumscription of Senecio[2] and the naturalness of these assemblages combined with the imprecise boundaries of the different species themselves.

Whether the recognition of numerous segregate genera provides a better taxonomy than treating the variation patterns as infrageneric taxa is yet unclear.

A respectable case can be made for maintaining Senecio as a broad concept, at least until revisionary studies at the species level are carried out and the results subjected to critical analyses.