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
Gallery of Plants
Tech Blog
Plant Profiles
Mailing Lists
    Search ALL lists
    Search help
    Subscription info
Top Stories
sHORTurl service
Tom Clothier's Archive
 Top Stories
New Trillium species discovered

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

RSS story archive

Re: Botanical Nomenclature

  • Subject: Re: Botanical Nomenclature
  • From: Riley2362@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

Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index

 © 1995-2017 Mallorn Computing, Inc.All Rights Reserved.
Our Privacy Statement