Re: What is "introduction"?

In a message dated 1/6/00 7:36:48 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
drsnooks@buffnet.net writes:

<<  It's my understanding that an intro only has to be "offered for sale to
 the public in a recognized, commonly acceptable publication". Can this
 possibly vary from society to society or is the rule universal, as part
 of the internationally accepted rules of registration? An ad in the
 official publication isn't REQUIRED, is it?
 
 There is a debate in another plant circle about whether offering an
 introduction for sale on the internet is "publication".>>

And Chris responded:

...and I have transposed the info below for the record. I believe that this
also answers in the affirmative Carolyn's question of whether advertisement
on the internet constitutes "introduction". 

The term "publication" is a charged one in the realms of taxonomy and not per 
se equivalent to "introduction." 

"Publication" of a name, which means the announcement of the naming of a new 
botanical entity, is one of the things which must be addressed to establish 
the name for scientific purposes under the terms of the International Code of 
Botanic Nomenclature. Names not "published" have no scientific standing.

These requirements are often subject to revision and hasten to shout that I 
may not have the most current poop here, but reduced to the basics, two 
criteria have been required for effective "publication" of names of species ( 
I'll get to the cultivated ones in a minute) plants: 1) Must be published in 
printed matter which is made available to the public or at least distributed 
to places in which botanial research is carried out. Must be books or 
scientific periodicals. Manuscripts, photocopies, newspapers, microfilm and 
other semi-permanent forms of matter have not always been deemed acceptable 
2) To be validly published a name must be accompanied by description of the 
plant or reference a published description. There are other criteria that 
must be met, too.

Now the general rules for cultivated plants have been a bit different. Here 
the name must be in a modern language not Latin, two or more cultivars cannot 
have the same name where such would cause confusion, ie, within the same 
genus. New culitvar names must be published by the distribution of printed 
matter dated to year, and a description is also required. It is also 
recommended that they be registered with a recognized registration authority 
(such as AIS for irises, or RHS for lilies) as a precaution against 
duplication and fraud. Not all genera have a recognized registration 
authority, and not all authorities have the same sorts of rules, but the idea 
is to get to the same place to firmly establish the legitimacy of the new 
name and associate it uniquely with the new plant.

So as I see it, our whole process of Registration and Introduction is 
designed to document the name, the privilidge of selection of which is 
accorded to the discoverer of the species or the creator of the cultivar, and 
to ensure that broad announcement of the existence of same is made to those 
who have interests in such matters.

I'd personally say that internet "publication" would meet most criteria for 
broad distribution of the information, but I would think concern about the 
permanency of the record would be an issue. In the genus Iris this would be 
less of an issue because AIS issues the ten year Check List compilations in 
printed form.

Anner Whitehead
HIPSource@aol.com

--------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ----------------------------

    GRAB THE GATOR! FREE SOFTWARE DOES ALL THE TYPING FOR YOU!
Tired of filling out forms and remembering passwords? Gator fills in
forms and passwords with just one click! Comes with $50 in free coupons!
  <a href=" http://clickme.onelist.com/ad/gator4 ">Click Here</a>

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