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: SEA GULLs & SEAGULLs

  • To: Multiple recipients of list <iris-l@rt66.com>
  • Subject: Re: SEA GULLs & SEAGULLs
  • From: "Albert F. Limberg" <campconn@pacbell.net>
  • Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 11:44:18 -0600 (MDT)

Sharon McAllister wrote:
> 
> Hang onto your hats.  =
> 
> This one's such a doozy I was
> hoping Mike Lowe would chime in.
> 
> The saga starts before the AIS
> Registration System was adopted.
> 
> SEA GULL -- Japanese introduced by
> Hallock about 1885.  Listed as obsolete
> & superceded in the 1939 CL.
> 
> SEA GULL -- DB by Van Fleet-Lovett,
> no date.  Name indicated as unapproved
> duplicate in '39 CL.
> 
> SEA GULL -- TB registered by Graves in
> 1937, not introduced.  Noted as obsolete
> and released in the '49 CL.
> 
> SEA GULL -- TB registered by Smith in 1946,
> noted as not introduced in the '49 CL but
> may have been introduced in the late '40s
> but not reported, or introduced later. =
> 
> SEAGULL.  TB introduced by Farr in
> 1922.  Name noted as REGISTERED
> and APPROVED in '39 CL, but superceded.
> 
> SEAGULL -- TB introduced by Nellis in
> 1947.  Name noted as NOT approved
> in the '49 CL.
> 
> To those accustomed to working with
> recent checklists, the earlier ones use
> type styleand symbols to convey information:
> 
> Registered and approved names
> are presented in CAPITALS.
> 
> Obsolete registered and approved names
> are presented in small capitals preceded
> by an asterisk.
> 
> Duplicate and unapproved names are
> presented with initial capitals and the rest
> of each word in lower case.
> 
> Synonyms are treated as duplicates, but
> in bold lower case.
> 
> An asterisk in front of a name meant it
> was considered obsolete -- probably no
> longer in existence.
> 
> A darkened circle in front of a name meant
> that it was considered nearly obsolete.
> 
> Perhaps more than you wanted to know, but
> in this case condensing the story destroys
> a lot of information.
> 
> The proverbial "Bottom Line":
> 
> Any in commerce today "should" be
> SEA  GULL -- two words -- the white self
> that Smith registered in 1946, which =
> 
> superceded both Graves' 1946 SEA
> GULL (two words) and Farr's 1922
> SEAGULL (one word).
> 
> Doesn't mean that it is, of course....
> 
> Sharon McAllister
> 73372.1745@compuserve.com

Good Grief!  And I thought federal law was complex.  Need a Philadelphia
taxonomist to decipher this.

Al Limberg
Concord, CA





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