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: Perfect Organisms


In a message dated Mon, 8 May 2000  9:47:52 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Iza &
Carol Goroff <goroff@idcnet.com> writes:

<<How that applies to an individual living being is that
such is an inadequate representative of the principles defining the type. The
principles are the truth which one should seek, looking past the specimen.

Hmmm...the closest thing I can think of to this in actual practice is the
breed standard for purebred animals.  Of course, no living Havana Brown cat
ever matches perfectly the breed standard; it is judged by how closely it
approaches that standard.  The question is, does anything like this occur
in talking of species?  What I mean is, given the description of, say,
Philodendron bipinnatifidum, do we compare a given specimen of that species
to the decription, and judge how closely it approaches the "standard"?

Jason Hernandez
Naturalist-at-Large







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