Re: [Aroid-l] Amorphophallus konjac or rivieri?

From: Susan B <honeybunny442 at yahoo.com> on 2010.02.13 at 18:15:16 Sorry Peter, I'm not following- could you reiterate for a "dummy"? Which name was published on Jan 1 1763? Susan --- On Thu, 2/11/10, Peter Boyce <phymatarum@googlemail.com> wrote: From: Peter Boyce <phymatarum@googlemail.com> Subject: Re: [Aroid-l] Amorphophallus konjac or rivieri? To: "'Discussion of aroids'" <aroid-l@gizmoworks.com> Date: Thursday, February 11, 2010, 2:38 AM The main point is that these two names are applied to the SAME biological entity that we term a species. In these instances the earliest name post 1 Jan. 1763 that is both effectively and validly published according the the current International Code of Botanical Nomenclature, has priority. If at some future point someone proves that in fact the taxon we call A. konjac indeed comprises TWO distinct entities AND if one of these entities is a good 'match' for the specimen that stands as the nomenclatural benchmark (Type) for the name A. rivieri then that name COULD be resurrected. Peter -----Original Message----- From: aroid-l-bounces@gizmoworks.com [mailto:aroid-l-bounces@gizmoworks.com] On Behalf Of Ken Mosher Sent: Thursday, 11 February, 2010 8:53 AM To: Discussion of aroids Subject: Re: [Aroid-l] Amorphophallus konjac or rivieri? rivieri is an old name. -Ken Susan B wrote: > I see many people refer to konjac as rivieri. > > What is the story behind that?  Is rivieri an old name, or what? > > Just curious.... > Susan > > _______________________________________________ Aroid-L mailing list Aroid-L@www.gizmoworks.com http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l _______________________________________________ Aroid-L mailing list Aroid-L@www.gizmoworks.com http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l =0A=0A --0-1173560647-1266084916=:53389----===============4887051071810743489==

Note: this is a very old post, so no reply function is available.