hort.net Seasonal photo, (c) 2006 Christopher P. Lindsey, All Rights Reserved: do not copy
articles | gallery of plants | blog | tech blog | plant profiles | patents | mailing lists | top stories | links | shorturl service | tom clothier's archive0
 Navigation
Articles
Gallery of Plants
Blog
Tech Blog
Plant Profiles
Patents
Mailing Lists
    FAQ
    Netiquette
    Search ALL lists
    Search help
    Subscription info
Top Stories
Links
sHORTurl service
Tom Clothier's Archive
 Top Stories
Disease could hit Britain's trees hard

Ten of the best snowdrop cultivars

Plant protein database helps identify plant gene functions

Dendroclimatologists record history through trees

Potato beetle could be thwarted through gene manipulation

Hawaii expands coffee farm quarantine

Study explains flower petal loss

Unauthorized use of a plant doesn't invalidate it's patent

RSS story archive

Re: NUMBERS IN HOSTA NAMES


 I wish you would read what I say before you disagree with my opinion.
Nowhere did I say that streaked plants should not be registered just
because they are streaked. What I said was:

 "The reason I'm asking is that I am not a big fan of naming, nor or
    registering, streaked plants unless they are truly unusual and
    outstanding for some reason."

Obviously I consider 'Dorothy Benedict' and many others to be outstanding for some reason. What I'm really not a big fan of is naming streaked hostas that have no other distinction than being streaked, and from some of the pictures I've seen, I can't find any reason to name some of these plants except that there are folks out there who will pay big bucks for a plant  just because it's streaked. Seems to me it's taking advantage of people who don't really understand what they are buying. 

Chick

Bill Meyer wrote:

  Hi Bobby,
       Was just reading over the daylily registration rules at the AHemS site
  here   http://www.daylilies.org/AHSregister.html   . So you're married to the
  registrar, eh? Must make things interesting when it comes to naming
  questions. Yes, things are much more developed than the AHosS registration
  process. We're still pretty much just leaving everything up to the Registrar
  at this point. There have been quite a few interesting challenges to the
  system so far, and I think we'll see a more developed system in the future.
  To appeal now you mostly go "Hey, Jim, what's wrong with my name? I think
  you should allow it."
        I feel rules and guidelines are important because they put everyone,
  even the Registrar, on the same footing. If you leave one person with too
  much power over a process people inevitably complain they are abusing that
  power even if they really aren't. With the ICNCP code being as vague as it
  is, this becomes even more of a problem.
       The code is an attempt to put together a set of rules that will fairly
  cover many different genera with very different plants among them. I feel
  that most of our problems that come from not developing our own set of rules
  come from applying a code that frequently is better adapted to flowers than
  foliage. As the flowers are a secondary consideration with most hostas (few
  are named for their flowers), we need guidelines which reflect the foliage
  characteristics.
        One persistant argument about streaked hostas is that the code refers
  to "stable" characteristics that can be propagated on, but does not define
  what that means. Some interpret that to mean all propagated material must
  carry that characteristic, while others say that if it can be propagated on
  it is stable, regardless of some odd divisions that do not carry the trait.
  These are the kind of things we need the AHosS to clarify in its own rules.
  In the next few years we will probably begin looking into putting together a
  set of rules for hosta registrations. It should make for some interesting di
  scussion.
         There were strong arguments that for a time held sway that streaked
  hostas should not even be allowed to be registered. I believe that there was
  a period when they were all rejected. Personally, I feel this was a mistake
  because the whole purpose of registrations is to create a (somewhat)
  accurate record of the plants of the time. What point is served by ignoring
  some of the most interesting and influential plants? Everyone today knows
  hostas like 'Dorothy Benedict', so how weird would it be for people looking
  back from the future to find no registrations for such important hostas?
        While I disagree personally with Chick's opinion of streaked plants,
  many others agree with him. Neither opinion is wrong in the eyes of either
  the ICRA or the AHosS as neither has any clear rules on the subject. The
  problem with not having rules is clearly illustrated by looking at what
  would happen if the next Registrar decides he is of Chick's opinion and
  again starts refusing any registrations for streaked plants.
                                         .......Bill Meyer

    Hey Bill,
    
    The daylily registration process continues to evolve just like all the

  other

    IRA's.  The one consistency is the ICNCP "rule book."  The daylily

  Registrar

    reviews each submitted name.  After this review each name is submitted to
    the full "Registrations Committee" along with the Registrar's

  recommendation

    for each name.  Sometime the recommendation is to reject because the name

  is

    already used or is in direct conflict with an existing rule (the reason is
    always stated). This is all done via email and the process is efficient

  and

    timely.  After final committee review the registrant is notified of the
    decision.  All decisions are subject to an appeal process.  The first

  level

    of appeal is back to the Registration Committee, the second level is to

  the

    AHS Board of Director's, if still unsatisfied, the final appeal is to the
    International Union of Biological Sciences Commission for the Nomenclature
    of Cultivated Plants.
    
    I was the first to test of the rules of the previous version of the ICNCP
    rules several years in a daylily registration. I submitted the name "A

  Moose

    Fishing On A Pond On Monday".  The registrar recommended to the committee
    that the name be denied but the committee overruled her because the ICNCP

  at

    the time stated that names could have up to 30 characters, excluding

  spaces,

    and up to ten syllables.  I was not upset with the Registrar and we remain
    happily married.
    
    I am not aware of the appeal process within the Hosta society but feel

  that

    any decision could ultimately be appealed to the IUBS.
    
    We just started growing hostas this year, and next year will be my first
    year of making crosses.  Hopefully a few years later I will register my
    first  hosta.
    
    Thank you for enjoying our web site.  That is another passion that has
    gotten out of control.
    
    Bobby
    
    ----- Original Message ----- 
    From: "Bill Meyer"     <njhosta@hotmail.com>    To:     <hosta-open@hort.net>    Sent: Sunday, August 29, 2004 10:25 AM
    Subject: Re: NUMBERS IN HOSTA NAMES

      Hi Bobby,
            Nice website. I see that you're more experienced with daylilies

  than

      hostas. A big difference between the AHemS and the AHosS is that the
      Hemerocallis society has its own registration rules in addition to the

    ICNCP

      code. All in all their system is much more developed than the Hosta

    society

      system at this time. The code as you've seen is very open to

    interpretation

      in many areas and decisions could go either way in a situation like

    Chick's.

      The AHemS has the advantage of some society rules to help clear up how
      things should be interpreted for daylily registrations, while the AHosS
      leaves it totally up to the Registrar.
            With hosta names, the decision to accept a name lies wholly in the
      Registrar's hands. I believe the Registrar does seek input from the
      Registrars of other genera when difficult issues arise, but the decision

    is

      wholly his to make, as long as it does fit within the often vague

    boundaries

      of the code.
             I prefer the idea of a society having rules on registration

  rather

      than leaving all decisions to an individual registrar. I've recommended

  to

      the AHosS Board that we look into putting such rules together. We

  recently

      had a big flare-up about registration issues which revolved around

  people

      not registering their plants "soon enough". With no clear rules from the
      society on when (or even if) we should register a plant, there is too

  much

      room for disagreement. I believe that in the near future we will see a

  set

      of rules and guidelines from the AHosS that will resolve some questions

    like

      Chick's naming quandary.
                                        ........Bill Meyer

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------
    To sign-off this list, send email to     majordomo@hort.net     with the
    message text UNSUBSCRIBE HOSTA-OPEN

  ---------------------------------------------------------------------
  To sign-off this list, send email to   majordomo@hort.net   with the
  message text UNSUBSCRIBE HOSTA-OPEN

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@hort.net with the
message text UNSUBSCRIBE HOSTA-OPEN





 © 1995-2015 Mallorn Computing, Inc.All Rights Reserved.
Our Privacy Statement
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index