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: Cultivar registration

  • To: Multiple recipients of list AROID-L <aroid-l@mobot.org>
  • Subject: Re: Cultivar registration
  • From: StellrJ@aol.com
  • Date: Sun, 14 May 2000 15:43:41 -0500 (CDT)

In a message dated Tue, 9 May 2000  8:08:46 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
SelbyHort@aol.com writes:

<< I can see that there is a big misunderstanding about what a cultivar
registrar is supposed to do. First of all, parentage is not required
information, although there will be space for this information (if known) on
the registration form. We may have some dynomite clone that needs to be
registered and not know a thing about its lineage.

This discussion arose out of confusion over taxonomy, did it not?  But
certain plants with a long history of cultivation have exited the realm of
traditional taxonomy.  Take tulips for example.  There are classes of
cultivars, e.g., Darwin tulips, Mendel tulips, lily-flowered tulips, but
these have no specific epithets; there is _Tulipa_ 'Glory of Appledoorn',
in which the cultivar name immediately follows the genus, because these
plants have been hybridized over and over until their parentage is no
longer known.  Then there is the class called "Species Tulips," consisting
of those relatively few wild-type _Tulipa_ species, and varieties derived
from known species.  Roses, Narcissi, and Irises have the same situation.

Where am I going with this?  I am simply saying that perhaps it is time to
adopt a similar policy toward aroids.  Those whose parentage is not known
should be classed in cultivar categories, and questions of species not

Jason Hernandez

 © 1995-2017 Mallorn Computing, Inc.All Rights Reserved.
Our Privacy Statement
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index