This is a public-interest archive. Personal data is pseudonymized and retained under GDPR Article 89.

Re: S."Bacularis"

Dear Ove,

We would call that "a needle in a haystack" but I get your meaning.

The problem with Sansevieria is that there are far too many dubious names
floating around for a realtively small number of species. Most of the plants
we see are cultivars of Sansevieria trifasciata. That there are a few
genuine undescribed species grown in gardens and the trade only complicates
matters.

Searching the Sansevierias archives using key words is no problem because it
will look for the word in the body of the text and not just the subject
heading. Just be sure to check off all the years and have it case
insensitive.

***************************************
One would have thought that someone at the Copenhagen BG would have taken
the time to look up the name Sansevieria sulcata to find the description for
it does not fit this plant. But then again I see many misnamed plants at
botanical gardens where you would think they would know better. Few have a
person skilled in taxonomy who can verify the identities of the plants. The
gulf between horticulture and botany can be a deep one. Sad but true.

***************************************
There are a couple problems referring to the plant as Sansevieria"Bacularis"
according to the International Code of Nomenclature for Cultivated Plants.
Namely, cultivar names are listed in single quotation marks not double
(article 29) and cultivar names cannot be in Latin form (article 27).

I would prefer to cite it as Sansevieria bacularis Pfennig (nom. prov.). The
last part in quotes shows it is a provisional name not yet validly
published. There is no chance that the late Horst Pfennig will be the one to
validly name it but since it is a distinctive species, not easily confused
with anything else, someone certainly will eventually name it. Pfennig
should be the one to get the credit for the name. The epithet "Bacularis" is
from the Latin "Balulum" meaning a club or a staff.

One should note that species epithets are always written in lower case
regardless of their derivation and cultivar name have the first letter
capitalized as proper names. Species epithets should never be cited without
the genus epithet given also. The genus name is often abbreviated.

Cereusly Steve

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Subject: S."Bacularis"
From: Ove Christensen <ovec@RAMSOE.MAIL.TELIA.COM>
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 12:04:09 -0800

Thank you for the help to Juan and Steve.

And I admit that I should have used some more time at the
Mallorn archives before I wrote!
But sometimes when I seek some of the older informations
(not all) it makes me feel like looking for a nail in the
hay! Especially when the wanted informations sometimes are
hidden under other subjectlines.
So please forgive me if I another time again will ask
questions of anything I am expected to find out by
myself.

Well, now I can meet up with all the facts and make short
process to any further discussion on this subject with my
friends in the BG.

But there also was a little misunderstanding!
Steve wrote:
>The question is why do they at the Copenhagen BG want to
>call it Sansevieria sulcata?

That is not so. The problem is that they have just got the
plant from another (to me unknovn BG) under that label!

And as we all in this Forum knows, changing labels is a
very disliked discipline - you have to be absolute certain
to the change!

Cheers

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