HYB: 301 -- Taxonomy

Edmundas Kondratas wrote:

>  Sharon McAllister wrote:
>
>  ......First, learn the general hierarchy:
> =

>  Genus
>    Subgenus
>      Section
>        Subsection
>          Series
<I think very important taxonomic unit in this place is lost. "Species" =3D=

!!!!!>

Worse than that!!!!  =

TWO were lost.
[Blame it on my bifocals....]

Anyway, that part of the sequence =

should have read: =

Series > Subseries > Species > Subspecies

>  I do not understand what you have in mind under the term "Cultivar", i=
f
=3D
>  we are speaking about Botanical taxonomy. Botanical clasification =3D
>  include only those plants, which grow in native. For Mother NATIVE all=
 -
=3D
>  Species, Subspecies, Variety, Subvariety, Form are cultivars. Can you =
=3D
>  tell  me some examples of "cultivars" in order as you understand. >   =
  =

=3D

Both the terms "variety" and "cultivar"
do mean different things to different
people.  I was using "cultivar" in the =

sense in which Werckmeister defined it, =

a "man-made  variety".  It is more =

commonly used to describe a registered
iris.  ANY rnamed iris we've been discussing,
like IMMORTALITY, is considered a
cultivar.

For example:

I. atropurpurea is an oncocyclus =

species, typically brownish-black in
color.  =


There have been reports and photographs,
however of a yellow-and-red bicolor and
a yellow self.  The yellow has been called
I. atropurpurea forma yellow.  This does
not mean that all yellow selfs of this
species are part of the same clone -- just
that they share a distinguishing characteristic.

RACHEL, however, was a selected clone
of the yellow form of I. atropurpurea.  Duly
registered with AIS, it would qualify as a
cultivar.

Sharon McAllister
73372.1745@compuserve.com  =3D3D
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index