Re: Botanical Nomenclature
- Subject: Re: Botanical Nomenclature
- From: R*@aol.com
- Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2009 13:10:20 EDT
|
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe there is anything such thing
as an ABSOLUTE in botanical nomenclature. So the use of the words "right,
wrong, legal, illegal" are not really fitting. Botanists publish
infromation in order to have their work recognized by the scientific community
and this lends "validation" to their work, so in the end, their names might be
"recognized" or "accepted" as "more correct". That is why data bases
usually contain all publications, rather than a biased perspective that whoever
compiled the database has ruled on the acceptance of any set of
information. Yes, it is confusing to horticulturists who just want to put
a name on a plant label, but the history is informative to the evolution and
classification of the plant material. What is more important than a plant
name would be an accession number that correlates to a time and place of
collection.
Michael Riley
|
_______________________________________________ Aroid-L mailing list Aroid-L@www.gizmoworks.com http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Botanical Nomenclature
- From: P* B* &*
- Re: Botanical Nomenclature
- Prev by Date: Re: Does anyone know this Philodendron?
- Next by Date: Re: Aphis on Pistia from M. Kolaczewski
- Previous by thread: Re: Aroid-L Digest, Vol 60, Issue 29
- Next by thread: Re: Botanical Nomenclature