Re: Iris virginica 'Alba'

 

I do not think I would choose a Google search as a definitive answer to anything.

Maybe not, but it certainly can give you a good idea, and the fact that there is literally NO mention of forma alba on the internet is a pretty good sign that it's not a valid taxon. And as it turns out, apparently it's not, if Van Tubergen got the species wrong.
 
Taxonomic rules change and presently the requirement would be that a NEW taxon would have to be in an accepted taxonomical journal.

Sorry, I thought you were discussing a current hypothetical situation when you said

If there were no botanical description officially recorded, you may still use the botanical Latin to describe it as a form of virginica with no author. Despite a large tome of botanical rules of nomenclature I know of no rule that says you are in violation of the official code by doing so.

Van Tubergen's catalog was a valid place to publish a scientific name back then. However, even by the rules of the time the name was not valid unless he provided some kind of description (which I assume he did - does anyone know?). See here: http://ibot.sav.sk/icbn/no%20frames/0038Ch4Sec2a034.htm

 
You will find that not all botanical authorities agree, and many today pay no attention to forma. Sadly I believe you will discover that many of the Western botanists (USA, Great Britain) often ignore them. Those that do, usually do not care about gardeners.

Too true, although I think I understand why. Formae don't normally give any insight into how plants are related to each other, since they're not generally a single lineage within a species.

Sean Z

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