Names for different forms?

From: Brian Williams <pugturd at alltel.net> on 2007.03.13 at 03:20:11(15405) I have recently been trying to up grade my data base of names as well as redo all my tags and make sure everything has as much data and information as possible. I have a few questions on forms. I know many plants have several forms of the same species. I would like to know if their are names for these forms or even if the science community really makes note of it? If not would putting a added portion to the name to help ID different forms be possible? If so who should come up with these name? Here are a few for instance off hand that I really think should have some more information. Their seems to be two very different forms of Veitchii one with wider leaves and much larger ripples. Then another form with thinner leaves and a much more rippled effect. I know that naming all slight different forms would not be worth while but for some very noticeable differences it could help people know exactly what they are getting and their seems to be a major price difference in one form compared to the other. Another one that comes to mind is the two forms of Anthurium warocqueanum one that can get 3 to 4 feet long and the smaller slender form with hardly any back lobes. They are very noticeably different yet go by the exact same name. If one was to order the plant under these name they could end up with either form though one form of each is usually much more sought after. +More _______________________________________________ Aroid-l mailing list Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l

From: "Julius Boos" <ju-bo at msn.com> on 2007.03.13 at 21:27:32(15410) Reply-To : Discussion of aroids Sent : Tuesday, March 13, 2007 3:20 AM To : Discussion of aroids Subject : [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? Dear Brian, This all goes back to an issue that to date has not been 'solved' by the aroid group, and which is a VERY difficult issue, namely the cultivar names and the correct registering of these names according to whatever horticultural rules/laws that may apply. The IAS has nominated several people over the past several years ( I can recall at least three) to do something about setting up some sort of registry to legitimize some or all of these names which are being bantered about, but to date I think the progress on instituting this system is not in place or even being worked on. I have mentioned on several occasions that when man collectes a certain plant from nature, he usually selects one which to him is the most attractive out of several hundred, maybe thousands of other 'less attractive' specimens he may see in the field. All of these plants, both the 'attractive' ones AND the less attractive ones are still all variations of ONE species. All I can suggest at this time is that you make a label that explains what the particular clone or var. of that plant is, for example Philodendron stenolobum var. narrow/wavy/long leaf, and/or P. stenolobum var. short and broad leaf, or 'Anthurium warocqueanum var. Murline Lydon minature', vs. 'Anthu. warocqueanum var. large leaf '. Collection data and collectors name would be another good bit of information to keep with all wild collected plants. Perhaps Derek Burch can give some sort of suggestion or soloution that may serve you guys better?? The Best, Julius +More I have recently been trying to up grade my data base of names as well as redo all my tags and make sure everything has as much data and information as possible. I have a few questions on forms. I know many plants have several forms of the same species. I would like to know if their are names for these forms or even if the science community really makes note of it? If not would putting a added portion to the name to help ID different forms be possible? If so who should come up with these name? Here are a few for instance off hand that I really think should have some more information. Their seems to be two very different forms of Veitchii one with wider leaves and much larger ripples. Then another form with thinner leaves and a much more rippled effect. I know that naming all slight different forms would not be worth while but for some very noticeable differences it could help people know exactly what they are getting and their seems to be a major price difference in one form compared to the other. Another one that comes to mind is the two forms of Anthurium warocqueanum one that can get 3 to 4 feet long and the smaller slender form with hardly any back lobes. They are very noticeably different yet go by the exact same name. If one was to order the plant under these name they could end up with either form though one form of each is usually much more sought after.<< _______________________________________________ Aroid-l mailing list Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l _______________________________________________ Aroid-l mailing list Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l

From: "Wilbert Hetterscheid" <hetter at xs4all.nl> on 2007.03.14 at 06:43:47(15411) Hi Brian and Julius, This is one of those subjects that I myself am engaged in professionally, as taxonomist of both plants in the wild and cultivated. Professional taxonomists may consider that identifying a specific variant in nature is useful and in that case they can make use of the classification categories of forma (f.) or varietas (botanical variety; var.). With the growing awareness of morphological dynamics in nature, this practice is slowing down considerably, at least in the "western" countries. This is good because all those var's and f's create more and more names and have a tendency to blurr the evolutionary infraspecific dynamics of groups of organisms. If however somebody selects a single specimen from a species in nature (or anywhere else) because of a striking character and he multiplies it into a group of plants that follows the prerequisites of Distinction (distinguishable from all other named selections of the species), Uniformity (the groups of plants to be named is uniform throughout) and Stability (the characteristics of the group remain after several cycles of propagation) (= DUS-norm), then the group may be considered a cultivar (cultivated variety) and named, registered and marketed as such. Also in the realm of cultivars and trade it is unwanted to have an explosion of cultivar-names, so if you have just 2 or so plants with a typical character then it is not wise to try and register it with a cultivar name. There is MUCH more to this subject but that would require me to write a book. Cheerio, Wilbert +More > > >>From : Brian Williams > Reply-To : Discussion of aroids > Sent : Tuesday, March 13, 2007 3:20 AM > To : Discussion of aroids > Subject : [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? > > > Dear Brian, > > This all goes back to an issue that to date has not been 'solved' by the > aroid group, and which is a VERY difficult issue, namely the cultivar > names > and the correct registering of these names according to whatever > horticultural rules/laws that may apply. > The IAS has nominated several people over the past several years ( I can > recall at least three) to do something about setting up some sort of > registry to legitimize some or all of these names which are being bantered > about, but to date I think the progress on instituting this system is not > in > place or even being worked on. > I have mentioned on several occasions that when man collectes a certain > plant from nature, he usually selects one which to him is the most > attractive out of several hundred, maybe thousands of other 'less > attractive' specimens he may see in the field. All of these plants, both > the 'attractive' ones AND the less attractive ones are still all > variations > of ONE species. > All I can suggest at this time is that you make a label that explains what > the particular clone or var. of that plant is, for example Philodendron > stenolobum var. narrow/wavy/long leaf, and/or P. stenolobum var. short and > broad leaf, or 'Anthurium warocqueanum var. Murline Lydon minature', vs. > 'Anthu. warocqueanum var. large leaf '. Collection data and collectors > name would be another good bit of information to keep with all wild > collected plants. > Perhaps Derek Burch can give some sort of suggestion or soloution that may > serve you guys better?? > > The Best, > > Julius > >>>I have recently been trying to up grade my data base of names as well as >>>redo all my tags and make sure everything has as much data and >>> information >>>as possible. I have a few questions on forms. I know many plants have >>>several forms of the same species. I would like to know if their are >>> names >>>for these forms or even if the science community really makes note of >>> it? >>>If not would putting a added portion to the name to help ID different >>>forms be possible? If so who should come up with these name? Here are a >>>few for instance off hand that I really think should have some more >>>information. Their seems to be two very different forms of Veitchii one >>>with wider leaves and much larger ripples. Then another form with >>> thinner >>>leaves and a much more rippled effect. I know that naming all slight >>>different forms would not be worth while but for some very noticeable >>>differences it could help people know exactly what they are getting and >>>their seems to be a major price difference in one form compared to the >>>other. Another one that comes to mind is the two forms of Anthurium >>>warocqueanum one that can get 3 to 4 feet long and the smaller slender >>>form with hardly any back lobes. They are very noticeably different yet >>> go >>>by the exact same name. If one was to order the plant under these name >>>they could end up with either form though one form of each is usually >>> much >>>more sought after.<< > _______________________________________________ > Aroid-l mailing list > Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com > http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l > > > _______________________________________________ > Aroid-l mailing list > Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com > http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l > _______________________________________________ Aroid-l mailing list Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l

From: "W. George Schmid" <hostahill at bellsouth.net> on 2007.03.14 at 15:11:33(15414) Julius, Some time ago we had an exchange on registering aroid cultivars in accordance with the ICNCP (INTERNATIONAL CODE OF NOMENCLATURE FOR CULTIVATED PLANTS 2004 edition). I made some suggestions and Derek worked on this also. Perhaps we can refresh our previous conversations and efforts. The problem I see in Araceae is to determine which aroids are valid taxa to be handled under the ICBN and which are in fact cultivated varieties (man-made hybrids) to be registered under the ICNCP. One of the problems we had under Hosta were the numerous interspecific, natural hybrids existing in the wild. We solved that problem by field investigations and accepted such hybrids as taxa if perpetuating populations were found to exist in the wild. In some cases, the holotypes were based on cultivated plants purportedly collected in the wild, but lacking field verification were reduced to cultivars under the ICNCP and so registered. From some of the earlier messages I deduce that interspecific hybridization may also be a problem with aroids. To determine synonymy, RAPD/DNA was employed to make the differentiations. That is an expensive process, though. It seems to me that a number of aroids in cultivation are not taxa (valid species) but culta (cultivars). George W. George Schmid +More Hosta Hill R. G. USDA Zone 7a - 1188 feet (361m) AMSL 84-12'-30" W 33-51' N All mail virus-scanned by McAfee -----Original Message----- On Behalf Of Julius Boos Sent: Tuesday, 13 March, 2007 17:28 To: aroid-l@gizmoworks.com Subject: RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? >From : Brian Williams Reply-To : Discussion of aroids Sent : Tuesday, March 13, 2007 3:20 AM To : Discussion of aroids Subject : [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? Dear Brian, This all goes back to an issue that to date has not been 'solved' by the aroid group, and which is a VERY difficult issue, namely the cultivar names and the correct registering of these names according to whatever horticultural rules/laws that may apply. The IAS has nominated several people over the past several years ( I can recall at least three) to do something about setting up some sort of registry to legitimize some or all of these names which are being bantered about, but to date I think the progress on instituting this system is not in place or even being worked on. I have mentioned on several occasions that when man collectes a certain plant from nature, he usually selects one which to him is the most attractive out of several hundred, maybe thousands of other 'less attractive' specimens he may see in the field. All of these plants, both the 'attractive' ones AND the less attractive ones are still all variations of ONE species. All I can suggest at this time is that you make a label that explains what the particular clone or var. of that plant is, for example Philodendron stenolobum var. narrow/wavy/long leaf, and/or P. stenolobum var. short and broad leaf, or 'Anthurium warocqueanum var. Murline Lydon minature', vs. 'Anthu. warocqueanum var. large leaf '. Collection data and collectors name would be another good bit of information to keep with all wild collected plants. Perhaps Derek Burch can give some sort of suggestion or soloution that may serve you guys better?? The Best, Julius >>I have recently been trying to up grade my data base of names as well >>as redo all my tags and make sure everything has as much data and >>information as possible. I have a few questions on forms. I know many >>plants have several forms of the same species. I would like to know if >>their are names for these forms or even if the science community really makes note of it? >>If not would putting a added portion to the name to help ID different >>forms be possible? If so who should come up with these name? Here are >>a few for instance off hand that I really think should have some more >>information. Their seems to be two very different forms of Veitchii >>one with wider leaves and much larger ripples. Then another form with >>thinner leaves and a much more rippled effect. I know that naming all >>slight different forms would not be worth while but for some very >>noticeable differences it could help people know exactly what they are >>getting and their seems to be a major price difference in one form >>compared to the other. Another one that comes to mind is the two forms >>of Anthurium warocqueanum one that can get 3 to 4 feet long and the >>smaller slender form with hardly any back lobes. They are very >>noticeably different yet go by the exact same name. If one was to >>order the plant under these name they could end up with either form >>though one form of each is usually much more sought after.<< _______________________________________________ Aroid-l mailing list Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l _______________________________________________ Aroid-l mailing list Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l _______________________________________________ Aroid-l mailing list Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l

From: "Julius Boos" <ju-bo at msn.com> on 2007.03.15 at 21:33:21(15421) Reply-To : Discussion of aroids Sent : Thursday, March 15, 2007 12:14 AM To : aroid-l@gizmoworks.com Subject : RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? Dear aroid Friends, First off, thanks to my friends George Schmid, Wilbert Hetterschied and Alistair Hay for their most informative comments on registering cultivars. I wrote to the L on behalf of Brian Williams, so hopefully he is better informed on what registering a cultivar involves. I guesss the NEXT big hurdle is---where does he register an aroid cultivar, with whom, and HOW does he go about doing so!! :--) Good Growing! Julius +More Pared down to the basics, the only salient part of a cultivar that comes under the ICBN is the genus. The cultivar name at the minimum consists of the genus name and the cv epithet. It does not matter all that much whether the plant is a selected man-made hybrid or a selection from a wild species or a selection from a natural hybrid population. The thing that is to be named is a clone, selected for some merit, within a genus. Thus: the gargantuan white-spathed Amorphophallus 'Wilbert's Surprise' can be defined, named, established and registered provided it is distinct from other cultivars of Amorphophallus, uniform and stable regardless of what species or hybrid it is. Of course it would be nice to have the information that it is an f2 hybrid of A. titanum and A. prainii, but that it not a necessary piece of information to name the cv. [I have made this example up, just in case anyone was wondering!]. The sort of problem that George raises would, I think, arise in specific circumstances where there was an intention to transfer a latin botanical epithet into a cultivar name. This can only be done where the entire taxon is a clone. A possible example is Aliocasia zebrina var tigrina: If it can be demonstrated that var. tigrina is a clone then that botanical varietal epithet can become the cultivar epithet as in Alocasia 'Tigrina'. If it is not clear whether var. tigrina is a clone then there are simpler solutions than DNA and field analysis. Either don't transfer the latin epithet at all, or translate it into a contemporary language e.g. Alocasia 'Tigrine' applied to the cultivated clone known now as "tigrina". That way the exact status of the botanical variety does not need to be found out at all, while a familiar name (slightly adjusted) can be retained as a cultivar epithet. What I am getting at is that the issues which George raises, while valid, should not necessarily create the impression of vast hurdles to getting things going with Aroid cv classifictaion. Alistair From: "W. George Schmid" Reply-To: Discussion of aroids To: "'Discussion of aroids'" Subject: RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 11:11:33 -0400 > >Julius, >Some time ago we had an exchange on registering aroid cultivars in >accordance with the ICNCP (INTERNATIONAL CODE OF NOMENCLATURE FOR CULTIVATED >PLANTS 2004 edition). I made some suggestions and Derek worked on this also. >Perhaps we can refresh our previous conversations and efforts. The problem I >see in Araceae is to determine which aroids are valid taxa to be handled >under the ICBN and which are in fact cultivated varieties (man-made hybrids) >to be registered under the ICNCP. One of the problems we had under Hosta >were the numerous interspecific, natural hybrids existing in the wild. We >solved that problem by field investigations and accepted such hybrids as >taxa if perpetuating populations were found to exist in the wild. In some >cases, the holotypes were based on cultivated plants purportedly collected >in the wild, but lacking field verification were reduced to cultivars under >the ICNCP and so registered. From some of the earlier messages I deduce that >interspecific hybridization may also be a problem with aroids. To determine >synonymy, RAPD/DNA was employed to make the differentiations. That is an >expensive process, though. It seems to me that a number of aroids in >cultivation are not taxa (valid species) but culta (cultivars). George > >W. George Schmid >Hosta Hill R. G. >USDA Zone 7a - 1188 feet (361m) AMSL >84-12'-30" W 33-51' N >All mail virus-scanned by McAfee > > >-----Original Message----- >From: aroid-l-bounces@gizmoworks.com [mailto:aroid-l-bounces@gizmoworks.com] >On Behalf Of Julius Boos >Sent: Tuesday, 13 March, 2007 17:28 >To: aroid-l@gizmoworks.com >Subject: RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? > > > > >From : Brian Williams >Reply-To : Discussion of aroids >Sent : Tuesday, March 13, 2007 3:20 AM >To : Discussion of aroids >Subject : [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? > > >Dear Brian, > >This all goes back to an issue that to date has not been 'solved' by the >aroid group, and which is a VERY difficult issue, namely the cultivar names >and the correct registering of these names according to whatever >horticultural rules/laws that may apply. >The IAS has nominated several people over the past several years ( I can >recall at least three) to do something about setting up some sort of >registry to legitimize some or all of these names which are being bantered >about, but to date I think the progress on instituting this system is not in >place or even being worked on. >I have mentioned on several occasions that when man collectes a certain >plant from nature, he usually selects one which to him is the most >attractive out of several hundred, maybe thousands of other 'less >attractive' specimens he may see in the field. All of these plants, both >the 'attractive' ones AND the less attractive ones are still all variations >of ONE species. >All I can suggest at this time is that you make a label that explains what >the particular clone or var. of that plant is, for example Philodendron >stenolobum var. narrow/wavy/long leaf, and/or P. stenolobum var. short and >broad leaf, or 'Anthurium warocqueanum var. Murline Lydon minature', vs. >'Anthu. warocqueanum var. large leaf '. Collection data and collectors >name would be another good bit of information to keep with all wild >collected plants. >Perhaps Derek Burch can give some sort of suggestion or soloution that may >serve you guys better?? > >The Best, > >Julius > > >>I have recently been trying to up grade my data base of names as well > >>as redo all my tags and make sure everything has as much data and > >>information as possible. I have a few questions on forms. I know many > >>plants have several forms of the same species. I would like to know if > >>their are names for these forms or even if the science community really >makes note of it? > >>If not would putting a added portion to the name to help ID different > >>forms be possible? If so who should come up with these name? Here are > >>a few for instance off hand that I really think should have some more > >>information. Their seems to be two very different forms of Veitchii > >>one with wider leaves and much larger ripples. Then another form with > >>thinner leaves and a much more rippled effect. I know that naming all > >>slight different forms would not be worth while but for some very > >>noticeable differences it could help people know exactly what they are > >>getting and their seems to be a major price difference in one form > >>compared to the other. Another one that comes to mind is the two forms > >>of Anthurium warocqueanum one that can get 3 to 4 feet long and the > >>smaller slender form with hardly any back lobes. They are very > >>noticeably different yet go by the exact same name. If one was to > >>order the plant under these name they could end up with either form > >>though one form of each is usually much more sought after.<< >_______________________________________________ >Aroid-l mailing list >Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com >http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l > > >_______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ Aroid-l mailing list Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l

From: "W. George Schmid" <hostahill at bellsouth.net> on 2007.03.15 at 22:20:50(15422) Entirely correct, Alistair, There should be +More no problems registering most aroid cultivars as you have pointed out. The genus name + cultivar name is usually sufficient to validly register a cultivar under the ICNCP. In other genera it has been found that certain valid species show considerable variation and some selected clones may be quite different from others. Clones might be an oxymoron, because most gardeners assume that a clones look exactly the same. While that is correct when one clones a selected "clone" from a variable wild population, it may be required that some cultivated clones will have to carry the full binomial + a cultivar name, to distinguish selected plants of a variable population of the same species. Another problem may arise when former species are found to be cultivars and have been validly reduced to cultivar rank. In Hosta, for example H. fortunei var. hyacinthina was found to be a European cultivated hybrid with no wild representation, so was reduced by me to cultivar rank and the name as a cultivar is H. 'Fortunei Hyacinthina' (per ICNCP articles). Another example are two non-perpetuating variegated chimaeral mutations of the same species found in the wild, which formerly were considered taxa under the ICBN. Thus H. ventricosa var. aureomarginata is now named H. ventricosa 'Aureomarginata' and H. ventricosa var. aureomaculata is now H. ventricosa 'Aureomaculata'. I am mentioning these, because occasionally the full binomial needs to be applied and the ICNCP contains numerous articles, which govern such use. Obviously none of this may apply to aroids, but we are very careful to make certain that in hybrids we perpetuate the parentage by asking for that information on the registration form. I believe that IAS already has work underway to facilitate registration of aroid cultivars and Derek is heading this effort. There is a link on the IAS website. I am involved more in taxonomy, but have been occupied with registrations for several genera and one thing we have found that it is difficult to come up with a registration form, which considers all of the different and salient morphological features to provide the foundation for a cultivar database. This will be particularly true in Araceae, with many different taxa being the source of cultivars. Without a comprehensive registration form it is difficult to get originators to register cultivars. That, I consider a hurdle (speaking from experience). Best, George W. George SchmidHosta Hill R. G.USDA Zone 7a - 1188 feet (361m) AMSL84-12'-30" W 33-51' NAll mail virus-scanned by McAfee [mailto:aroid-l-bounces@gizmoworks.com] On Behalf Of Alistair HaySent: Wednesday, 14 March, 2007 20:14To: aroid-l@gizmoworks.comSubject: RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? Pared down to the basics, the only salient part of a cultivar that comes under the ICBN is the genus. The cultivar name at the minimum consists of the genus name and the cv epithet. It does not matter all that much whether the plant is a selected man-made hybrid or a selection from a wild species or a selection from a natural hybrid population. The thing that is to be named is a clone, selected for some merit, within a genus. Thus: the gargantuan white-spathed Amorphophallus 'Wilbert's Surprise' can be defined, named, established and registered provided it is distinct from other cultivars of Amorphophallus, uniform and stable regardless of what species or hybrid it is. Of course it would be nice to have the information that it is an f2 hybrid of A. titanum and A. prainii, but that it not a necessary piece of information to name the cv. [I have made this example up, just in case anyone was wondering!]. The sort of problem that George raises would, I think, arise in specific circumstances where there was an intention to transfer a latin botanical epithet into a cultivar name. This can only be done where the entire taxon is a clone. A possible example is Aliocasia zebrina var tigrina: If it can be demonstrated that var. tigrina is a clone then that botanical varietal epithet can become the cultivar epithet as in Alocasia 'Tigrina'. If it is not clear whether var. tigrina is a clone then there are simpler solutions than DNA and field analysis. Either don't transfer the latin epithet at all, or translate it into a contemporary language e.g. Alocasia 'Tigrine' applied to the cultivated clone known now as "tigrina". That way the exact status of the botanical variety does not need to be found out at all, while a familiar name (slightly adjusted) can be retained as a cultivar epithet. What I am getting at is that the issues which George raises, while valid, should not necessarily create the impression of vast hurdles to getting things going with Aroid cv classifictaion. Alistair _______________________________________________ Aroid-l mailing list Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l

From: Brian Williams <pugturd at alltel.net> on 2007.03.15 at 23:36:41(15423) This have been very informative. As you pointed out Alistair that some form are already known as different clones. I forgotten all about the different Alocasia lowii forms that are already out there. I am surprised that this is not seen in other aroid groups as much? As for the hybrids it would be very nice to be able to register them with the society or at least some sort of data base so that in the future they can help botanist and hobbyist ID their species or hybrids. I have been breeding a lot of new Alocasias, Colocasias and other aroid genera. I have been keeping good records of all my work. But if something were to happen to me my data would be lost forever. I know many people on the group are only are interested in species. The fact is that their are already tons of hybrids and other forms out in the trade. We have a data base for species and I think a data base for hybrids, mutations and different forms would be very helpful. I think more of the mainstream people grow more hybrids and colorful forms than they do species. Helping keep the names and IDs correct on them could be very useful for a larger group of people. Not only in keeping the parents data and cultivar names but also keeping known hybrids from getting mistaken for true species. Would be a big task but would be a nice addition to the site. Just a thought. +More _______________________________________________ Aroid-l mailing list Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l

From: Brian Williams <pugturd at alltel.net> on 2007.03.16 at 00:23:02(15424) Thanks already answering questions before I get them written down. Julius as always extremely helpful even from the beginning of my collecting days!! +More _______________________________________________ Aroid-l mailing list Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l

From: "Alistair Hay" <ajmhay at hotmail.com> on 2007.03.16 at 01:06:55(15425) I hestitate, with Wilbert and Gearoge's great experience present here, to suggest how to move forward! But only briefly lol. I don't mind being shot down in flames and will probabkly learn something useful as I am currently up to the armpits in cultivar registration for another group (Brugmansia) Given that this has got off to false starts, I would strongly advocate not trying to create an all-encompassing system first off: that looks to me as though it would all fall over again. Adopt the KISS principle and get something hapening which can be improved in time. Also remember that cultivar registration is voluntary: if the system created is onerous and boring to to comply with, people won't. An often-encountered misunderstanding is that cultivar registration is equivalent to cultivar naming, It is not. A cultivar can be named (i.e. the name formally established) in almost any form of publication (bar newspapers and a few other things (see 2004 Code)). So if you name a cv in a printed nursery catalogue and there is even a one-word description of it, and the publication is dated, the name is established provided it meets some other technical requirements (which most cultivar epithets do). Registration simply means that the ICRA accepts that the cultivar has been properly named somewhere and has incorporated it into its Register (which can be nothing more elaborate than an excel spreadsheet or even a scrap-book!). The Registration process is there to assist the ICRA in gathering the information it is responsible for managing. 1. As ICRA for Aroids IAS sh/could (I suggest) devote some pages ("ICRA pages") at the back of Aroideana to the publication of new cultivar names (if this is not happening already - sorry, I am out of touch!). Later these pages can also be used to publish determinations on the validity of names where issues arise that need a decision. A simple format for publishing a new cv is Amorphophallus 'Wilbert's Surprise' [PHOTO] Seed parent: A. titanum (un-named clone); Pollen parent: A. prainii (un-named clone) Hybridiser: George W. Bush; Seedling Parent [if different from hybridiser]: Tony Blair [OR Discoverer: John Howard (if the cultivar has in effect been 'found' - in the wild, as an accidental seedling, as a sport etc] Origin: USA; Introduced: 2006 Salient features: Spathe xxx, etc etc (keeping this to the minimum necessary to capture the distinctive points). Note: this may evolve into the bulk of a registration form designed around different genera/tribes, but I suggest do this when the need arises and when you know exactky why it is needed rather than designing elaborate registration forms up front. Name established: here [or if publishng a cultivar whose name is established elsewhere, give the reference.] IMO this covers the key stuff to start with. If this (or something sinmilar) is adopted it may encourage people to publish cultuvars in Aroideana rather than in obscure price lists printed off a home PC - which is currently permitted under the 2004 Code and is a $%^&#@ nuisance!. 2. An online Register is set up to, at first, accommodate the new cultivars published in Aroideana with the same information and pics, and to which are added all established cultivar names in Araceae as they are gathered up by the Registrar and anyone assisting over time! The online registry includes the template for publishing new cvs in Aroideana (outlined above), and Aroid-L, IAS website and perhaps Dave;s Garden are used to announce the deadlines for submission of new cultivars for establishmens in Aroideana each year. As the designated ICRA you are, I believe, responsible fior providing this service to members and non-members alike. This seems to me to be the minimum necessary to make this work. I have not discussed nomenclatural standards and other recomendations of the Code, in the belief that f you try to do it all perfectly at once it all just seems too much! Apologes if you have been over all this already!! A +More From: "Julius Boos" Reply-To: Discussion of aroids To: aroid-l@gizmoworks.comSubject: RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms?Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 21:33:21 +0000>>>>From : Alistair Hay >Reply-To : Discussion of aroids >Sent : Thursday, March 15, 2007 12:14 AM>To : aroid-l@gizmoworks.com>Subject : RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms?>>Dear aroid Friends,>>First off, thanks to my friends George Schmid, Wilbert Hetterschied >and Alistair Hay for their most informative comments on registering >cultivars.>I wrote to the L on behalf of Brian Williams, so hopefully he is >better informed on what registering a cultivar involves. I guesss >the NEXT big hurdle is---where does he register an aroid cultivar, >with whom, and HOW does he go about doing so!! :--)>>Good Growing!>>Julius>>Pared down to the basics, the only salient part of a cultivar that >comes under the ICBN is the genus. The cultivar name at the minimum >consists of the genus name and the cv epithet.>>It does not matter all that much whether the plant is a selected >man-made hybrid or a selection from a wild species or a selection >from a natural hybrid population. The thing that is to be named is a >clone, selected for some merit, within a genus.>>Thus: the gargantuan white-spathed Amorphophallus 'Wilbert's >Surprise' can be defined, named, established and registered >provided it is distinct from other cultivars of Amorphophallus, >uniform and stable regardless of what species or hybrid it is. Of >course it would be nice to have the information that it is an f2 >hybrid of A. titanum and A. prainii, but that it not a necessary >piece of information to name the cv. [I have made this example up, >just in case anyone was wondering!].>>The sort of problem that George raises would, I think, arise in >specific circumstances where there was an intention to transfer a >latin botanical epithet into a cultivar name. This can only be done >where the entire taxon is a clone. A possible example is Aliocasia >zebrina var tigrina: If it can be demonstrated that var. tigrina is >a clone then that botanical varietal epithet can become the cultivar >epithet as in Alocasia 'Tigrina'. If it is not clear whether var. >tigrina is a clone then there are simpler solutions than DNA and >field analysis. Either don't transfer the latin epithet at all, or >translate it into a contemporary language e.g. Alocasia 'Tigrine' >applied to the cultivated clone known now as "tigrina". That way the >exact status of the botanical variety does not need to be found out >at all, while a familiar name (slightly adjusted) can be retained as >a cultivar epithet.>>What I am getting at is that the issues which George raises, while >valid, should not necessarily create the impression of vast hurdles >to getting things going with Aroid cv classifictaion.>>>>Alistair>>>>>>>>>> From: "W. George Schmid" > Reply-To: Discussion of aroids > To: "'Discussion of aroids'" > Subject: RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms?> Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 11:11:33 -0400> >> >Julius,> >Some time ago we had an exchange on registering aroid cultivars >in> >accordance with the ICNCP (INTERNATIONAL CODE OF NOMENCLATURE >FOR CULTIVATED> >PLANTS 2004 edition). I made some suggestions and Derek worked >on this also.> >Perhaps we can refresh our previous conversations and efforts. >The problem I> >see in Araceae is to determine which aroids are valid taxa to >be handled> >under the ICBN and which are in fact cultivated varieties >(man-made hybrids)> >to be registered under the ICNCP. One of the problems we had >under Hosta> >were the numerous interspecific, natural hybrids existing in >the wild. We> >solved that problem by field investigations and accepted such >hybrids as> >taxa if perpetuating populations were found to exist in the >wild. In some> >cases, the holotypes were based on cultivated plants >purportedly collected> >in the wild, but lacking field verification were reduced to >cultivars under> >the ICNCP and so registered. From some of the earlier messages >I deduce that> >interspecific hybridization may also be a problem with aroids. >To determine> >synonymy, RAPD/DNA was employed to make the differentiations. >That is an> >expensive process, though. It seems to me that a number of >aroids in> >cultivation are not taxa (valid species) but culta (cultivars). >George> >> >W. George Schmid> >Hosta Hill R. G.> >USDA Zone 7a - 1188 feet (361m) AMSL> >84-12'-30" W 33-51' N> >All mail virus-scanned by McAfee> >> >> >-----Original Message-----> >From: aroid-l-bounces@gizmoworks.com >[mailto:aroid-l-bounces@gizmoworks.com]> >On Behalf Of Julius Boos> >Sent: Tuesday, 13 March, 2007 17:28> >To: aroid-l@gizmoworks.com> >Subject: RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms?> >> >> >> > >From : Brian Williams > >Reply-To : Discussion of aroids > >Sent : Tuesday, March 13, 2007 3:20 AM> >To : Discussion of aroids > >Subject : [Aroid-l] Names for different forms?> >> >> >Dear Brian,> >> >This all goes back to an issue that to date has not been >'solved' by the> >aroid group, and which is a VERY difficult issue, namely the >cultivar names> >and the correct registering of these names according to >whatever> >horticultural rules/laws that may apply.> >The IAS has nominated several people over the past several >years ( I can> >recall at least three) to do something about setting up some >sort of> >registry to legitimize some or all of these names which are >being bantered> >about, but to date I think the progress on instituting this >system is not in> >place or even being worked on.> >I have mentioned on several occasions that when man collectes a >certain> >plant from nature, he usually selects one which to him is the >most> >attractive out of several hundred, maybe thousands of other >'less> >attractive' specimens he may see in the field. All of these >plants, both> >the 'attractive' ones AND the less attractive ones are still >all variations> >of ONE species.> >All I can suggest at this time is that you make a label that >explains what> >the particular clone or var. of that plant is, for example >Philodendron> >stenolobum var. narrow/wavy/long leaf, and/or P. stenolobum >var. short and> >broad leaf, or 'Anthurium warocqueanum var. Murline Lydon >minature', vs.> >'Anthu. warocqueanum var. large leaf '. Collection data and >collectors> >name would be another good bit of information to keep with all >wild> >collected plants.> >Perhaps Derek Burch can give some sort of suggestion or >soloution that may> >serve you guys better??> >> >The Best,> >> >Julius> >> > >>I have recently been trying to up grade my data base of >names as well> > >>as redo all my tags and make sure everything has as much >data and> > >>information as possible. I have a few questions on forms. I >know many> > >>plants have several forms of the same species. I would like >to know if> > >>their are names for these forms or even if the science >community really> >makes note of it?> > >>If not would putting a added portion to the name to help ID >different> > >>forms be possible? If so who should come up with these name? >Here are> > >>a few for instance off hand that I really think should have >some more> > >>information. Their seems to be two very different forms of >Veitchii> > >>one with wider leaves and much larger ripples. Then another >form with> > >>thinner leaves and a much more rippled effect. I know that >naming all> > >>slight different forms would not be worth while but for some >very> > >>noticeable differences it could help people know exactly >what they are> > >>getting and their seems to be a major price difference in >one form> > >>compared to the other. Another one that comes to mind is the >two forms> > >>of Anthurium warocqueanum one that can get 3 to 4 feet long >and the> > >>smaller slender form with hardly any back lobes. They are >very> > >>noticeably different yet go by the exact same name. If one >was to> > >>order the plant under these name they could end up with >either form> > >>though one form of each is usually much more sought after.<<> >_______________________________________________> >Aroid-l mailing list> >Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com> >http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l> >> >> >_______________________________________________>>>_______________________________________________>Aroid-l mailing list>Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com>http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l _______________________________________________ Aroid-l mailing list Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l

From: Hermine <hermine at endangeredspecies.com> on 2007.03.18 at 18:47:05(15431) may I have permission to quote your remarks on cultivar naming? hermine +More I hesitate, with Wilbert and Gearoge's great experience present here, to suggest how to move forward! But only briefly lol. I don't mind being shot down in flames and will probably learn something useful as I am currently up to the armpits in cultivar registration for another group (Brugmansia) Given that this has got off to false starts, I would strongly advocate not trying to create an all-encompassing system first off: that looks to me as though it would all fall over again. Adopt the KISS principle and get something happening which can be improved in time. Also remember that cultivar registration is voluntary: if the system created is onerous and boring to comply with, people won't. An often-encountered misunderstanding is that cultivar registration is equivalent to cultivar naming, It is not. A cultivar can be named (i.e. the name formally established) in almost any form of publication (bar newspapers and a few other things (see 2004 Code)). So if you name a cv in a printed nursery catalogue and there is even a one-word description of it, and the publication is dated, the name is established provided it meets some other technical requirements (which most cultivar epithets do). Registration simply means that the ICRA accepts that the cultivar has been properly named somewhere and has incorporated it into its Register (which can be nothing more elaborate than an excel spreadsheet or even a scrap-book!). The Registration process is there to assist the ICRA in gathering the information it is responsible for managing. 1. As ICRA for Aroids IAS sh/could (I suggest) devote some pages ("ICRA pages") at the back of Aroideana to the publication of new cultivar names (if this is not happening already - sorry, I am out of touch!). Later these pages can also be used to publish determinations on the validity of names where issues arise that need a decision. A simple format for publishing a new cv is Amorphophallus 'Wilbert's Surprise' [PHOTO] Seed parent: A. titanum (un-named clone); Pollen parent: A. prainii (un-named clone) Hybridiser: George W. Bush; Seedling Parent [if different from hybridiser]: Tony Blair [OR Discoverer: John Howard (if the cultivar has in effect been 'found' - in the wild, as an accidental seedling, as a sport etc] Origin: USA; Introduced: 2006 Salient features: Spathe xxx, etc etc (keeping this to the minimum necessary to capture the distinctive points). Note: this may evolve into the bulk of a registration form designed around different genera/tribes, but I suggest do this when the need arises and when you know exactky why it is needed rather than designing elaborate registration forms up front. Name established: here [or if publishng a cultivar whose name is established elsewhere, give the reference.] IMO this covers the key stuff to start with. If this (or something sinmilar) is adopted it may encourage people to publish cultuvars in Aroideana rather than in obscure price lists printed off a home PC - which is currently permitted under the 2004 Code and is a $%^&#@ nuisance!. 2. An online Register is set up to, at first, accommodate the new cultivars published in Aroideana with the same information and pics, and to which are added all established cultivar names in Araceae as they are gathered up by the Registrar and anyone assisting over time! The online registry includes the template for publishing new cvs in Aroideana (outlined above), and Aroid-L, IAS website and perhaps Dave;s Garden are used to announce the deadlines for submission of new cultivars for establishmens in Aroideana each year. As the designated ICRA you are, I believe, responsible fior providing this service to members and non-members alike. This seems to me to be the minimum necessary to make this work. I have not discussed nomenclatural standards and other recomendations of the Code, in the belief that f you try to do it all perfectly at once it all just seems too much! Apologes if you have been over all this already!! A From: "Julius Boos" Reply-To: Discussion of aroids To: aroid-l@gizmoworks.com Subject: RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 21:33:21 +0000 > > >>From : Alistair Hay >Reply-To : Discussion of aroids >Sent : Thursday, March 15, 2007 12:14 AM >To : aroid-l@gizmoworks.com >Subject : RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? > >Dear aroid Friends, > >First off, thanks to my friends George Schmid, Wilbert Hetterschied >and Alistair Hay for their most informative comments on registering >cultivars. >I wrote to the L on behalf of Brian Williams, so hopefully he is >better informed on what registering a cultivar involves. I guesss >the NEXT big hurdle is---where does he register an aroid cultivar, >with whom, and HOW does he go about doing so!! :--) > >Good Growing! > >Julius > >Pared down to the basics, the only salient part of a cultivar that >comes under the ICBN is the genus. The cultivar name at the minimum >consists of the genus name and the cv epithet. > >It does not matter all that much whether the plant is a selected >man-made hybrid or a selection from a wild species or a selection >from a natural hybrid population. The thing that is to be named is a >clone, selected for some merit, within a genus. > >Thus: the gargantuan white-spathed Amorphophallus 'Wilbert's >Surprise' can be defined, named, established and registered >provided it is distinct from other cultivars of Amorphophallus, >uniform and stable regardless of what species or hybrid it is. Of >course it would be nice to have the information that it is an f2 >hybrid of A. titanum and A. prainii, but that it not a necessary >piece of information to name the cv. [I have made this example up, >just in case anyone was wondering!]. > >The sort of problem that George raises would, I think, arise in >specific circumstances where there was an intention to transfer a >latin botanical epithet into a cultivar name. This can only be done >where the entire taxon is a clone. A possible example is Aliocasia >zebrina var tigrina: If it can be demonstrated that var. tigrina is >a clone then that botanical varietal epithet can become the cultivar >epithet as in Alocasia 'Tigrina'. If it is not clear whether var. >tigrina is a clone then there are simpler solutions than DNA and >field analysis. Either don't transfer the latin epithet at all, or >translate it into a contemporary language e.g. Alocasia 'Tigrine' >applied to the cultivated clone known now as "tigrina". That way the >exact status of the botanical variety does not need to be found out >at all, while a familiar name (slightly adjusted) can be retained as >a cultivar epithet. > >What I am getting at is that the issues which George raises, while >valid, should not necessarily create the impression of vast hurdles >to getting things going with Aroid cv classifictaion. > > > >Alistair > > > > > > > > > > From: "W. George Schmid" > Reply-To: Discussion of aroids > To: "'Discussion of aroids'" > Subject: RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? > Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 11:11:33 -0400 > > > >Julius, > >Some time ago we had an exchange on registering aroid cultivars >in > >accordance with the ICNCP (INTERNATIONAL CODE OF NOMENCLATURE >FOR CULTIVATED > >PLANTS 2004 edition). I made some suggestions and Derek worked >on this also. > >Perhaps we can refresh our previous conversations and efforts. >The problem I > >see in Araceae is to determine which aroids are valid taxa to >be handled > >under the ICBN and which are in fact cultivated varieties >(man-made hybrids) > >to be registered under the ICNCP. One of the problems we had >under Hosta > >were the numerous interspecific, natural hybrids existing in >the wild. We > >solved that problem by field investigations and accepted such >hybrids as > >taxa if perpetuating populations were found to exist in the >wild. In some > >cases, the holotypes were based on cultivated plants >purportedly collected > >in the wild, but lacking field verification were reduced to >cultivars under > >the ICNCP and so registered. From some of the earlier messages >I deduce that > >interspecific hybridization may also be a problem with aroids. >To determine > >synonymy, RAPD/DNA was employed to make the differentiations. >That is an > >expensive process, though. It seems to me that a number of >aroids in > >cultivation are not taxa (valid species) but culta (cultivars). >George > > > >W. George Schmid > >Hosta Hill R. G. > >USDA Zone 7a - 1188 feet (361m) AMSL > >84-12'-30" W 33-51' N > >All mail virus-scanned by McAfee > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: aroid-l-bounces@gizmoworks.com >[ mailto:aroid-l-bounces@gizmoworks.com] > >On Behalf Of Julius Boos > >Sent: Tuesday, 13 March, 2007 17:28 > >To: aroid-l@gizmoworks.com > >Subject: RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? > > > > > > > > >From : Brian Williams > >Reply-To : Discussion of aroids > >Sent : Tuesday, March 13, 2007 3:20 AM > >To : Discussion of aroids > >Subject : [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? > > > > > >Dear Brian, > > > >This all goes back to an issue that to date has not been >'solved' by the > >aroid group, and which is a VERY difficult issue, namely the >cultivar names > >and the correct registering of these names according to >whatever > >horticultural rules/laws that may apply. > >The IAS has nominated several people over the past several >years ( I can > >recall at least three) to do something about setting up some >sort of > >registry to legitimize some or all of these names which are >being bantered > >about, but to date I think the progress on instituting this >system is not in > >place or even being worked on. > >I have mentioned on several occasions that when man collectes a >certain > >plant from nature, he usually selects one which to him is the >most > >attractive out of several hundred, maybe thousands of other >'less > >attractive' specimens he may see in the field. All of these >plants, both > >the 'attractive' ones AND the less attractive ones are still >all variations > >of ONE species. > >All I can suggest at this time is that you make a label that >explains what > >the particular clone or var. of that plant is, for example >Philodendron > >stenolobum var. narrow/wavy/long leaf, and/or P. stenolobum >var. short and > >broad leaf, or 'Anthurium warocqueanum var. Murline Lydon >minature', vs. > >'Anthu. warocqueanum var. large leaf '. Collection data and >collectors > >name would be another good bit of information to keep with all >wild > >collected plants. > >Perhaps Derek Burch can give some sort of suggestion or >soloution that may > >serve you guys better?? > > > >The Best, > > > >Julius > > > > >>I have recently been trying to up grade my data base of >names as well > > >>as redo all my tags and make sure everything has as much >data and > > >>information as possible. I have a few questions on forms. I >know many > > >>plants have several forms of the same species. I would like >to know if > > >>their are names for these forms or even if the science >community really > >makes note of it? > > >>If not would putting a added portion to the name to help ID >different > > >>forms be possible? If so who should come up with these name? >Here are > > >>a few for instance off hand that I really think should have >some more > > >>information. Their seems to be two very different forms of >Veitchii > > >>one with wider leaves and much larger ripples. Then another >form with > > >>thinner leaves and a much more rippled effect. I know that >naming all > > >>slight different forms would not be worth while but for some >very > > >>noticeable differences it could help people know exactly >what they are > > >>getting and their seems to be a major price difference in >one form > > >>compared to the other. Another one that comes to mind is the >two forms > > >>of Anthurium warocqueanum one that can get 3 to 4 feet long >and the > > >>smaller slender form with hardly any back lobes. They are >very > > >>noticeably different yet go by the exact same name. If one >was to > > >>order the plant under these name they could end up with >either form > > >>though one form of each is usually much more sought after.<< > >_______________________________________________ > >Aroid-l mailing list > >Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com > > http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > >_______________________________________________ >Aroid-l mailing list >Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com > http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l _______________________________________________ Aroid-l mailing list Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l Hermine Stover, Secretary Responsible Dog Owners Of The Western States 23280 Stephanie Perris CA 92570 310 925 8407 |\ _,,,---,,_ /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' ''Le Chat qui dort '---''(_/--' `-'\_) _______________________________________________ Aroid-l mailing list Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l

From: "Wilbert Hetterscheid" <hetter at xs4all.nl> on 2007.03.19 at 16:44:51(15442) Well, it is not my immediate business (the question is not addressed to me), but this Australian Brugmansia guy is talking about "gargantuan" Amorphophallus cultivar named after me................. Somehow there is a (hardly) hidden hint in there. I will send a lawyer upon everyone's feeble body who uses my name in dishonour.............and this lawyer will clean you out in no time!!!!!!!!!!!!! Wilbert +More Van: aroid-l-bounces@gizmoworks.com [mailto:aroid-l-bounces@gizmoworks.com] Namens HermineVerzonden: zondag 18 maart 2007 19:47Aan: Discussion of aroidsOnderwerp: RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? may I have permission to quote your remarks on cultivar naming?hermine I hesitate, with Wilbert and Gearoge's great experience present here, to suggest how to move forward! But only briefly lol. I don't mind being shot down in flames and will probably learn something useful as I am currently up to the armpits in cultivar registration for another group (Brugmansia)Given that this has got off to false starts, I would strongly advocate not trying to create an all-encompassing system first off: that looks to me as though it would all fall over again. Adopt the KISS principle and get something happening which can be improved in time.Also remember that cultivar registration is voluntary: if the system created is onerous and boring to comply with, people won't.An often-encountered misunderstanding is that cultivar registration is equivalent to cultivar naming, It is not. A cultivar can be named (i.e. the name formally established) in almost any form of publication (bar newspapers and a few other things (see 2004 Code)). So if you name a cv in a printed nursery catalogue and there is even a one-word description of it, and the publication is dated, the name is established provided it meets some other technical requirements (which most cultivar epithets do). Registration simply means that the ICRA accepts that the cultivar has been properly named somewhere and has incorporated it into its Register (which can be nothing more elaborate than an excel spreadsheet or even a scrap-book!). The Registration process is there to assist the ICRA in gathering the information it is responsible for managing.1. As ICRA for Aroids IAS sh/could (I suggest) devote some pages ("ICRA pages") at the back of Aroideana to the publication of new cultivar names (if this is not happening already - sorry, I am out of touch!). Later these pages can also be used to publish determinations on the validity of names where issues arise that need a decision.A simple format for publishing a new cv is Amorphophallus 'Wilbert's Surprise' [PHOTO]Seed parent: A. titanum (un-named clone); Pollen parent: A. prainii (un-named clone)Hybridiser: George W. Bush; Seedling Parent [if different from hybridiser]: Tony Blair[OR Discoverer: John Howard (if the cultivar has in effect been 'found' - in the wild, as an accidental seedling, as a sport etc]Origin: USA; Introduced: 2006Salient features: Spathe xxx, etc etc (keeping this to the minimum necessary to capture the distinctive points). Note: this may evolve into the bulk of a registration form designed around different genera/tribes, but I suggest do this when the need arises and when you know exactky why it is needed rather than designing elaborate registration forms up front.Name established: here [or if publishng a cultivar whose name is established elsewhere, give the reference.]IMO this covers the key stuff to start with.If this (or something sinmilar) is adopted it may encourage people to publish cultuvars in Aroideana rather than in obscure price lists printed off a home PC - which is currently permitted under the 2004 Code and is a $%^&#@ nuisance!.2. An online Register is set up to, at first, accommodate the new cultivars published in Aroideana with the same information and pics, and to which are added all established cultivar names in Araceae as they are gathered up by the Registrar and anyone assisting over time!The online registry includes the template for publishing new cvs in Aroideana (outlined above), and Aroid-L, IAS website and perhaps Dave;s Garden are used to announce the deadlines for submission of new cultivars for establishmens in Aroideana each year. As the designated ICRA you are, I believe, responsible fior providing this service to members and non-members alike.This seems to me to be the minimum necessary to make this work. I have not discussed nomenclatural standards and other recomendations of the Code, in the belief that f you try to do it all perfectly at once it all just seems too much!Apologes if you have been over all this already!!A From: "Julius Boos" Reply-To: Discussion of aroids To: aroid-l@gizmoworks.com Subject: RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 21:33:21 +0000 > > >>From : Alistair Hay >Reply-To : Discussion of aroids >Sent : Thursday, March 15, 2007 12:14 AM >To : aroid-l@gizmoworks.com >Subject : RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? > >Dear aroid Friends, > >First off, thanks to my friends George Schmid, Wilbert Hetterschied >and Alistair Hay for their most informative comments on registering >cultivars. >I wrote to the L on behalf of Brian Williams, so hopefully he is >better informed on what registering a cultivar involves. I guesss >the NEXT big hurdle is---where does he register an aroid cultivar, >with whom, and HOW does he go about doing so!! :--) > >Good Growing! > >Julius > >Pared down to the basics, the only salient part of a cultivar that >comes under the ICBN is the genus. The cultivar name at the minimum >consists of the genus name and the cv epithet. > >It does not matter all that much whether the plant is a selected >man-made hybrid or a selection from a wild species or a selection >from a natural hybrid population. The thing that is to be named is a >clone, selected for some merit, within a genus. > >Thus: the gargantuan white-spathed Amorphophallus 'Wilbert's >Surprise' can be defined, named, established and registered >provided it is distinct from other cultivars of Amorphophallus, >uniform and stable regardless of what species or hybrid it is. Of >course it would be nice to have the information that it is an f2 >hybrid of A. titanum and A. prainii, but that it not a necessary >piece of information to name the cv. [I have made this example up, >just in case anyone was wondering!]. > >The sort of problem that George raises would, I think, arise in >specific circumstances where there was an intention to transfer a >latin botanical epithet into a cultivar name. This can only be done >where the entire taxon is a clone. A possible example is Aliocasia >zebrina var tigrina: If it can be demonstrated that var. tigrina is >a clone then that botanical varietal epithet can become the cultivar >epithet as in Alocasia 'Tigrina'. If it is not clear whether var. >tigrina is a clone then there are simpler solutions than DNA and >field analysis. Either don't transfer the latin epithet at all, or >translate it into a contemporary language e.g. Alocasia 'Tigrine' >applied to the cultivated clone known now as "tigrina". That way the >exact status of the botanical variety does not need to be found out >at all, while a familiar name (slightly adjusted) can be retained as >a cultivar epithet. > >What I am getting at is that the issues which George raises, while >valid, should not necessarily create the impression of vast hurdles >to getting things going with Aroid cv classifictaion. > > > >Alistair > > > > > > > > > > From: "W. George Schmid" > Reply-To: Discussion of aroids > To: "'Discussion of aroids'" > Subject: RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? > Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 11:11:33 -0400 > > > >Julius, > >Some time ago we had an exchange on registering aroid cultivars >in > >accordance with the ICNCP (INTERNATIONAL CODE OF NOMENCLATURE >FOR CULTIVATED > >PLANTS 2004 edition). I made some suggestions and Derek worked >on this also. > >Perhaps we can refresh our previous conversations and efforts. >The problem I > >see in Araceae is to determine which aroids are valid taxa to >be handled > >under the ICBN and which are in fact cultivated varieties >(man-made hybrids) > >to be registered under the ICNCP. One of the problems we had >under Hosta > >were the numerous interspecific, natural hybrids existing in >the wild. We > >solved that problem by field investigations and accepted such >hybrids as > >taxa if perpetuating populations were found to exist in the >wild. In some > >cases, the holotypes were based on cultivated plants >purportedly collected > >in the wild, but lacking field verification were reduced to >cultivars under > >the ICNCP and so registered. From some of the earlier messages >I deduce that > >interspecific hybridization may also be a problem with aroids. >To determine > >synonymy, RAPD/DNA was employed to make the differentiations. >That is an > >expensive process, though. It seems to me that a number of >aroids in > >cultivation are not taxa (valid species) but culta (cultivars). >George > > > >W. George Schmid > >Hosta Hill R. G. > >USDA Zone 7a - 1188 feet (361m) AMSL > >84-12'-30" W 33-51' N > >All mail virus-scanned by McAfee > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: aroid-l-bounces@gizmoworks.com >[ mailto:aroid-l-bounces@gizmoworks.com] > >On Behalf Of Julius Boos > >Sent: Tuesday, 13 March, 2007 17:28 > >To: aroid-l@gizmoworks.com > >Subject: RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? > > > > > > > > >From : Brian Williams > >Reply-To : Discussion of aroids > >Sent : Tuesday, March 13, 2007 3:20 AM > >To : Discussion of aroids > >Subject : [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? > > > > > >Dear Brian, > > > >This all goes back to an issue that to date has not been >'solved' by the > >aroid group, and which is a VERY difficult issue, namely the >cultivar names > >and the correct registering of these names according to >whatever > >horticultural rules/laws that may apply. > >The IAS has nominated several people over the past several >years ( I can > >recall at least three) to do something about setting up some >sort of > >registry to legitimize some or all of these names which are >being bantered > >about, but to date I think the progress on instituting this >system is not in > >place or even being worked on. > >I have mentioned on several occasions that when man collectes a >certain > >plant from nature, he usually selects one which to him is the >most > >attractive out of several hundred, maybe thousands of other >'less > >attractive' specimens he may see in the field. All of these >plants, both > >the 'attractive' ones AND the less attractive ones are still >all variations > >of ONE species. > >All I can suggest at this time is that you make a label that >explains what > >the particular clone or var. of that plant is, for example >Philodendron > >stenolobum var. narrow/wavy/long leaf, and/or P. stenolobum >var. short and > >broad leaf, or 'Anthurium warocqueanum var. Murline Lydon >minature', vs. > >'Anthu. warocqueanum var. large leaf '. Collection data and >collectors > >name would be another good bit of information to keep with all >wild > >collected plants. > >Perhaps Derek Burch can give some sort of suggestion or >soloution that may > >serve you guys better?? > > > >The Best, > > > >Julius > > > > >>I have recently been trying to up grade my data base of >names as well > > >>as redo all my tags and make sure everything has as much >data and > > >>information as possible. I have a few questions on forms. I >know many > > >>plants have several forms of the same species. I would like >to know if > > >>their are names for these forms or even if the science >community really > >makes note of it? > > >>If not would putting a added portion to the name to help ID >different > > >>forms be possible? If so who should come up with these name? >Here are > > >>a few for instance off hand that I really think should have >some more > > >>information. Their seems to be two very different forms of >Veitchii > > >>one with wider leaves and much larger ripples. Then another >form with > > >>thinner leaves and a much more rippled effect. I know that >naming all > > >>slight different forms would not be worth while but for some >very > > >>noticeable differences it could help people know exactly >what they are > > >>getting and their seems to be a major price difference in >one form > > >>compared to the other. Another one that comes to mind is the >two forms > > >>of Anthurium warocqueanum one that can get 3 to 4 feet long >and the > > >>smaller slender form with hardly any back lobes. They are >very > > >>noticeably different yet go by the exact same name. If one >was to > > >>order the plant under these name they could end up with >either form > > >>though one form of each is usually much more sought after.<< > >_______________________________________________ > >Aroid-l mailing list > >Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com > > http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > >_______________________________________________ >Aroid-l mailing list >Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com > http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l_______________________________________________Aroid-l mailing listAroid-l@gizmoworks.comhttp://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l Hermine Stover, SecretaryResponsible Dog Owners Of The Western States23280 StephaniePerris CA 92570310 925 8407 |\ _,,,---,,_ /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' ''Le Chat qui dort '---''(_/--' `-'\_) _______________________________________________ Aroid-l mailing list Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l

From: "Alistair Hay" <ajmhay at hotmail.com> on 2007.03.19 at 20:44:55(15446) Ummm, to whiom?? LOL I hesitate, with Wilbert and Gearoge's great experience present here, to suggest how to move forward! But only briefly lol. I don't mind being shot down in flames and will probably learn something useful as I am currently up to the armpits in cultivar registration for another group (Brugmansia)Given that this has got off to false starts, I would strongly advocate not trying to create an all-encompassing system first off: that looks to me as though it would all fall over again. Adopt the KISS principle and get something happening which can be improved in time.Also remember that cultivar registration is voluntary: if the system created is onerous and boring to comply with, people won't.An often-encountered misunderstanding is that cultivar registration is equivalent to cultivar naming, It is not. A cultivar can be named (i.e. the name formally established) in almost any form of publication (bar newspapers and a few other things (see 2004 Code)). So if you name a cv in a printed nursery catalogue and there is even a one-word description of it, and the publication is dated, the name is established provided it meets some other technical requirements (which most cultivar epithets do). Registration simply means that the ICRA accepts that the cultivar has been properly named somewhere and has incorporated it into its Register (which can be nothing more elaborate than an excel spreadsheet or even a scrap-book!). The Registration process is there to assist the ICRA in gathering the information it is responsible for managing.1. As ICRA for Aroids IAS sh/could (I suggest) devote some pages ("ICRA pages") at the back of Aroideana to the publication of new cultivar names (if this is not happening already - sorry, I am out of touch!). Later these pages can also be used to publish determinations on the validity of names where issues arise that need a decision.A simple format for publishing a new cv is Amorphophallus 'Wilbert's Surprise' [PHOTO]Seed parent: A. titanum (un-named clone); Pollen parent: A. prainii (un-named clone)Hybridiser: George W. Bush; Seedling Parent [if different from hybridiser]: Tony Blair[OR Discoverer: John Howard (if the cultivar has in effect been 'found' - in the wild, as an accidental seedling, as a sport etc]Origin: USA; Introduced: 2006Salient features: Spathe xxx, etc etc (keeping this to the minimum necessary to capture the distinctive points). Note: this may evolve into the bulk of a registration form designed around different genera/tribes, but I suggest do this when the need arises and when you know exactky why it is needed rather than designing elaborate registration forms up front.Name established: here [or if publishng a cultivar whose name is established elsewhere, give the reference.]IMO this covers the key stuff to start with.If this (or something sinmilar) is adopted it may encourage people to publish cultuvars in Aroideana rather than in obscure price lists printed off a home PC - which is currently permitted under the 2004 Code and is a $%^&#@ nuisance!.2. An online Register is set up to, at first, accommodate the new cultivars published in Aroideana with the same information and pics, and to which are added all established cultivar names in Araceae as they are gathered up by the Registrar and anyone assisting over time!The online registry includes the template for publishing new cvs in Aroideana (outlined above), and Aroid-L, IAS website and perhaps Dave;s Garden are used to announce the deadlines for submission of new cultivars for establishmens in Aroideana each year. As the designated ICRA you are, I believe, responsible fior providing this service to members and non-members alike.This seems to me to be the minimum necessary to make this work. I have not discussed nomenclatural standards and other recomendations of the Code, in the belief that f you try to do it all perfectly at once it all just seems too much!Apologes if you have been over all this already!!A +More From: "Julius Boos" Reply-To: Discussion of aroids To: aroid-l@gizmoworks.com Subject: RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 21:33:21 +0000 > > >>From : Alistair Hay >Reply-To : Discussion of aroids >Sent : Thursday, March 15, 2007 12:14 AM >To : aroid-l@gizmoworks.com >Subject : RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? > >Dear aroid Friends, > >First off, thanks to my friends George Schmid, Wilbert Hetterschied >and Alistair Hay for their most informative comments on registering >cultivars. >I wrote to the L on behalf of Brian Williams, so hopefully he is >better informed on what registering a cultivar involves. I guesss >the NEXT big hurdle is---where does he register an aroid cultivar, >with whom, and HOW does he go about doing so!! :--) > >Good Growing! > >Julius > >Pared down to the basics, the only salient part of a cultivar that >comes under the ICBN is the genus. The cultivar name at the minimum >consists of the genus name and the cv epithet. > >It does not matter all that much whether the plant is a selected >man-made hybrid or a selection from a wild species or a selection >from a natural hybrid population. The thing that is to be named is a >clone, selected for some merit, within a genus. > >Thus: the gargantuan white-spathed Amorphophallus 'Wilbert's >Surprise' can be defined, named, established and registered >provided it is distinct from other cultivars of Amorphophallus, >uniform and stable regardless of what species or hybrid it is. Of >course it would be nice to have the information that it is an f2 >hybrid of A. titanum and A. prainii, but that it not a necessary >piece of information to name the cv. [I have made this example up, >just in case anyone was wondering!]. > >The sort of problem that George raises would, I think, arise in >specific circumstances where there was an intention to transfer a >latin botanical epithet into a cultivar name. This can only be done >where the entire taxon is a clone. A possible example is Aliocasia >zebrina var tigrina: If it can be demonstrated that var. tigrina is >a clone then that botanical varietal epithet can become the cultivar >epithet as in Alocasia 'Tigrina'. If it is not clear whether var. >tigrina is a clone then there are simpler solutions than DNA and >field analysis. Either don't transfer the latin epithet at all, or >translate it into a contemporary language e.g. Alocasia 'Tigrine' >applied to the cultivated clone known now as "tigrina". That way the >exact status of the botanical variety does not need to be found out >at all, while a familiar name (slightly adjusted) can be retained as >a cultivar epithet. > >What I am getting at is that the issues which George raises, while >valid, should not necessarily create the impression of vast hurdles >to getting things going with Aroid cv classifictaion. > > > >Alistair > > > > > > > > > > From: "W. George Schmid" > Reply-To: Discussion of aroids > To: "'Discussion of aroids'" > Subject: RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? > Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 11:11:33 -0400 > > > >Julius, > >Some time ago we had an exchange on registering aroid cultivars >in > >accordance with the ICNCP (INTERNATIONAL CODE OF NOMENCLATURE >FOR CULTIVATED > >PLANTS 2004 edition). I made some suggestions and Derek worked >on this also. > >Perhaps we can refresh our previous conversations and efforts. >The problem I > >see in Araceae is to determine which aroids are valid taxa to >be handled > >under the ICBN and which are in fact cultivated varieties >(man-made hybrids) > >to be registered under the ICNCP. One of the problems we had >under Hosta > >were the numerous interspecific, natural hybrids existing in >the wild. We > >solved that problem by field investigations and accepted such >hybrids as > >taxa if perpetuating populations were found to exist in the >wild. In some > >cases, the holotypes were based on cultivated plants >purportedly collected > >in the wild, but lacking field verification were reduced to >cultivars under > >the ICNCP and so registered. From some of the earlier messages >I deduce that > >interspecific hybridization may also be a problem with aroids. >To determine > >synonymy, RAPD/DNA was employed to make the differentiations. >That is an > >expensive process, though. It seems to me that a number of >aroids in > >cultivation are not taxa (valid species) but culta (cultivars). >George > > > >W. George Schmid > >Hosta Hill R. G. > >USDA Zone 7a - 1188 feet (361m) AMSL > >84-12'-30" W 33-51' N > >All mail virus-scanned by McAfee > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: aroid-l-bounces@gizmoworks.com >[ mailto:aroid-l-bounces@gizmoworks.com] > >On Behalf Of Julius Boos > >Sent: Tuesday, 13 March, 2007 17:28 > >To: aroid-l@gizmoworks.com > >Subject: RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? > > > > > > > > >From : Brian Williams > >Reply-To : Discussion of aroids > >Sent : Tuesday, March 13, 2007 3:20 AM > >To : Discussion of aroids > >Subject : [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? > > > > > >Dear Brian, > > > >This all goes back to an issue that to date has not been >'solved' by the > >aroid group, and which is a VERY difficult issue, namely the >cultivar names > >and the correct registering of these names according to >whatever > >horticultural rules/laws that may apply. > >The IAS has nominated several people over the past several >years ( I can > >recall at least three) to do something about setting up some >sort of > >registry to legitimize some or all of these names which are >being bantered > >about, but to date I think the progress on instituting this >system is not in > >place or even being worked on. > >I have mentioned on several occasions that when man collectes a >certain > >plant from nature, he usually selects one which to him is the >most > >attractive out of several hundred, maybe thousands of other >'less > >attractive' specimens he may see in the field. All of these >plants, both > >the 'attractive' ones AND the less attractive ones are still >all variations > >of ONE species. > >All I can suggest at this time is that you make a label that >explains what > >the particular clone or var. of that plant is, for example >Philodendron > >stenolobum var. narrow/wavy/long leaf, and/or P. stenolobum >var. short and > >broad leaf, or 'Anthurium warocqueanum var. Murline Lydon >minature', vs. > >'Anthu. warocqueanum var. large leaf '. Collection data and >collectors > >name would be another good bit of information to keep with all >wild > >collected plants. > >Perhaps Derek Burch can give some sort of suggestion or >soloution that may > >serve you guys better?? > > > >The Best, > > > >Julius > > > > >>I have recently been trying to up grade my data base of >names as well > > >>as redo all my tags and make sure everything has as much >data and > > >>information as possible. I have a few questions on forms. I >know many > > >>plants have several forms of the same species. I would like >to know if > > >>their are names for these forms or even if the science >community really > >makes note of it? > > >>If not would putting a added portion to the name to help ID >different > > >>forms be possible? If so who should come up with these name? >Here are > > >>a few for instance off hand that I really think should have >some more > > >>information. Their seems to be two very different forms of >Veitchii > > >>one with wider leaves and much larger ripples. Then another >form with > > >>thinner leaves and a much more rippled effect. I know that >naming all > > >>slight different forms would not be worth while but for some >very > > >>noticeable differences it could help people know exactly >what they are > > >>getting and their seems to be a major price difference in >one form > > >>compared to the other. Another one that comes to mind is the >two forms > > >>of Anthurium warocqueanum one that can get 3 to 4 feet long >and the > > >>smaller slender form with hardly any back lobes. They are >very > > >>noticeably different yet go by the exact same name. If one >was to > > >>order the plant under these name they could end up with >either form > > >>though one form of each is usually much more sought after.<< > >_______________________________________________ > >Aroid-l mailing list > >Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com > > http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > >_______________________________________________ >Aroid-l mailing list >Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com > http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l_______________________________________________Aroid-l mailing listAroid-l@gizmoworks.comhttp://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l Hermine Stover, SecretaryResponsible Dog Owners Of The Western States23280 StephaniePerris CA 92570310 925 8407 |\ _,,,---,,_ /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' ''Le Chat qui dort '---''(_/--' `-'\_) >_______________________________________________>Aroid-l mailing list>Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com>http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l _______________________________________________ Aroid-l mailing list Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l

From: "Alistair Hay" <ajmhay at hotmail.com> on 2007.03.19 at 21:30:17(15447) It was in honor of your MIND :-) Well, it is not my immediate business (the question is not addressed to me), but this Australian Brugmansia guy is talking about "gargantuan" Amorphophallus cultivar named after me................. Somehow there is a (hardly) hidden hint in there. I will send a lawyer upon everyone's feeble body who uses my name in dishonour.............and this lawyer will clean you out in no time!!!!!!!!!!!!! Wilbert +More Van: aroid-l-bounces@gizmoworks.com [mailto:aroid-l-bounces@gizmoworks.com] Namens HermineVerzonden: zondag 18 maart 2007 19:47Aan: Discussion of aroidsOnderwerp: RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? may I have permission to quote your remarks on cultivar naming?hermine I hesitate, with Wilbert and Gearoge's great experience present here, to suggest how to move forward! But only briefly lol. I don't mind being shot down in flames and will probably learn something useful as I am currently up to the armpits in cultivar registration for another group (Brugmansia)Given that this has got off to false starts, I would strongly advocate not trying to create an all-encompassing system first off: that looks to me as though it would all fall over again. Adopt the KISS principle and get something happening which can be improved in time.Also remember that cultivar registration is voluntary: if the system created is onerous and boring to comply with, people won't.An often-encountered misunderstanding is that cultivar registration is equivalent to cultivar naming, It is not. A cultivar can be named (i.e. the name formally established) in almost any form of publication (bar newspapers and a few other things (see 2004 Code)). So if you name a cv in a printed nursery catalogue and there is even a one-word description of it, and the publication is dated, the name is established provided it meets some other technical requirements (which most cultivar epithets do). Registration simply means that the ICRA accepts that the cultivar has been properly named somewhere and has incorporated it into its Register (which can be nothing more elaborate than an excel spreadsheet or even a scrap-book!). The Registration process is there to assist the ICRA in gathering the information it is responsible for managing.1. As ICRA for Aroids IAS sh/could (I suggest) devote some pages ("ICRA pages") at the back of Aroideana to the publication of new cultivar names (if this is not happening already - sorry, I am out of touch!). Later these pages can also be used to publish determinations on the validity of names where issues arise that need a decision.A simple format for publishing a new cv is Amorphophallus 'Wilbert's Surprise' [PHOTO]Seed parent: A. titanum (un-named clone); Pollen parent: A. prainii (un-named clone)Hybridiser: George W. Bush; Seedling Parent [if different from hybridiser]: Tony Blair[OR Discoverer: John Howard (if the cultivar has in effect been 'found' - in the wild, as an accidental seedling, as a sport etc]Origin: USA; Introduced: 2006Salient features: Spathe xxx, etc etc (keeping this to the minimum necessary to capture the distinctive points). Note: this may evolve into the bulk of a registration form designed around different genera/tribes, but I suggest do this when the need arises and when you know exactky why it is needed rather than designing elaborate registration forms up front.Name established: here [or if publishng a cultivar whose name is established elsewhere, give the reference.]IMO this covers the key stuff to start with.If this (or something sinmilar) is adopted it may encourage people to publish cultuvars in Aroideana rather than in obscure price lists printed off a home PC - which is currently permitted under the 2004 Code and is a $%^&#@ nuisance!.2. An online Register is set up to, at first, accommodate the new cultivars published in Aroideana with the same information and pics, and to which are added all established cultivar names in Araceae as they are gathered up by the Registrar and anyone assisting over time!The online registry includes the template for publishing new cvs in Aroideana (outlined above), and Aroid-L, IAS website and perhaps Dave;s Garden are used to announce the deadlines for submission of new cultivars for establishmens in Aroideana each year. As the designated ICRA you are, I believe, responsible fior providing this service to members and non-members alike.This seems to me to be the minimum necessary to make this work. I have not discussed nomenclatural standards and other recomendations of the Code, in the belief that f you try to do it all perfectly at once it all just seems too much!Apologes if you have been over all this already!!A From: "Julius Boos" Reply-To: Discussion of aroids To: aroid-l@gizmoworks.com Subject: RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 21:33:21 +0000 > > >>From : Alistair Hay >Reply-To : Discussion of aroids >Sent : Thursday, March 15, 2007 12:14 AM >To : aroid-l@gizmoworks.com >Subject : RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? > >Dear aroid Friends, > >First off, thanks to my friends George Schmid, Wilbert Hetterschied >and Alistair Hay for their most informative comments on registering >cultivars. >I wrote to the L on behalf of Brian Williams, so hopefully he is >better informed on what registering a cultivar involves. I guesss >the NEXT big hurdle is---where does he register an aroid cultivar, >with whom, and HOW does he go about doing so!! :--) > >Good Growing! > >Julius > >Pared down to the basics, the only salient part of a cultivar that >comes under the ICBN is the genus. The cultivar name at the minimum >consists of the genus name and the cv epithet. > >It does not matter all that much whether the plant is a selected >man-made hybrid or a selection from a wild species or a selection >from a natural hybrid population. The thing that is to be named is a >clone, selected for some merit, within a genus. > >Thus: the gargantuan white-spathed Amorphophallus 'Wilbert's >Surprise' can be defined, named, established and registered >provided it is distinct from other cultivars of Amorphophallus, >uniform and stable regardless of what species or hybrid it is. Of >course it would be nice to have the information that it is an f2 >hybrid of A. titanum and A. prainii, but that it not a necessary >piece of information to name the cv. [I have made this example up, >just in case anyone was wondering!]. > >The sort of problem that George raises would, I think, arise in >specific circumstances where there was an intention to transfer a >latin botanical epithet into a cultivar name. This can only be done >where the entire taxon is a clone. A possible example is Aliocasia >zebrina var tigrina: If it can be demonstrated that var. tigrina is >a clone then that botanical varietal epithet can become the cultivar >epithet as in Alocasia 'Tigrina'. If it is not clear whether var. >tigrina is a clone then there are simpler solutions than DNA and >field analysis. Either don't transfer the latin epithet at all, or >translate it into a contemporary language e.g. Alocasia 'Tigrine' >applied to the cultivated clone known now as "tigrina". That way the >exact status of the botanical variety does not need to be found out >at all, while a familiar name (slightly adjusted) can be retained as >a cultivar epithet. > >What I am getting at is that the issues which George raises, while >valid, should not necessarily create the impression of vast hurdles >to getting things going with Aroid cv classifictaion. > > > >Alistair > > > > > > > > > > From: "W. George Schmid" > Reply-To: Discussion of aroids > To: "'Discussion of aroids'" > Subject: RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? > Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 11:11:33 -0400 > > > >Julius, > >Some time ago we had an exchange on registering aroid cultivars >in > >accordance with the ICNCP (INTERNATIONAL CODE OF NOMENCLATURE >FOR CULTIVATED > >PLANTS 2004 edition). I made some suggestions and Derek worked >on this also. > >Perhaps we can refresh our previous conversations and efforts. >The problem I > >see in Araceae is to determine which aroids are valid taxa to >be handled > >under the ICBN and which are in fact cultivated varieties >(man-made hybrids) > >to be registered under the ICNCP. One of the problems we had >under Hosta > >were the numerous interspecific, natural hybrids existing in >the wild. We > >solved that problem by field investigations and accepted such >hybrids as > >taxa if perpetuating populations were found to exist in the >wild. In some > >cases, the holotypes were based on cultivated plants >purportedly collected > >in the wild, but lacking field verification were reduced to >cultivars under > >the ICNCP and so registered. From some of the earlier messages >I deduce that > >interspecific hybridization may also be a problem with aroids. >To determine > >synonymy, RAPD/DNA was employed to make the differentiations. >That is an > >expensive process, though. It seems to me that a number of >aroids in > >cultivation are not taxa (valid species) but culta (cultivars). >George > > > >W. George Schmid > >Hosta Hill R. G. > >USDA Zone 7a - 1188 feet (361m) AMSL > >84-12'-30" W 33-51' N > >All mail virus-scanned by McAfee > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: aroid-l-bounces@gizmoworks.com >[ mailto:aroid-l-bounces@gizmoworks.com] > >On Behalf Of Julius Boos > >Sent: Tuesday, 13 March, 2007 17:28 > >To: aroid-l@gizmoworks.com > >Subject: RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? > > > > > > > > >From : Brian Williams > >Reply-To : Discussion of aroids > >Sent : Tuesday, March 13, 2007 3:20 AM > >To : Discussion of aroids > >Subject : [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? > > > > > >Dear Brian, > > > >This all goes back to an issue that to date has not been >'solved' by the > >aroid group, and which is a VERY difficult issue, namely the >cultivar names > >and the correct registering of these names according to >whatever > >horticultural rules/laws that may apply. > >The IAS has nominated several people over the past several >years ( I can > >recall at least three) to do something about setting up some >sort of > >registry to legitimize some or all of these names which are >being bantered > >about, but to date I think the progress on instituting this >system is not in > >place or even being worked on. > >I have mentioned on several occasions that when man collectes a >certain > >plant from nature, he usually selects one which to him is the >most > >attractive out of several hundred, maybe thousands of other >'less > >attractive' specimens he may see in the field. All of these >plants, both > >the 'attractive' ones AND the less attractive ones are still >all variations > >of ONE species. > >All I can suggest at this time is that you make a label that >explains what > >the particular clone or var. of that plant is, for example >Philodendron > >stenolobum var. narrow/wavy/long leaf, and/or P. stenolobum >var. short and > >broad leaf, or 'Anthurium warocqueanum var. Murline Lydon >minature', vs. > >'Anthu. warocqueanum var. large leaf '. Collection data and >collectors > >name would be another good bit of information to keep with all >wild > >collected plants. > >Perhaps Derek Burch can give some sort of suggestion or >soloution that may > >serve you guys better?? > > > >The Best, > > > >Julius > > > > >>I have recently been trying to up grade my data base of >names as well > > >>as redo all my tags and make sure everything has as much >data and > > >>information as possible. I have a few questions on forms. I >know many > > >>plants have several forms of the same species. I would like >to know if > > >>their are names for these forms or even if the science >community really > >makes note of it? > > >>If not would putting a added portion to the name to help ID >different > > >>forms be possible? If so who should come up with these name? >Here are > > >>a few for instance off hand that I really think should have >some more > > >>information. Their seems to be two very different forms of >Veitchii > > >>one with wider leaves and much larger ripples. Then another >form with > > >>thinner leaves and a much more rippled effect. I know that >naming all > > >>slight different forms would not be worth while but for some >very > > >>noticeable differences it could help people know exactly >what they are > > >>getting and their seems to be a major price difference in >one form > > >>compared to the other. Another one that comes to mind is the >two forms > > >>of Anthurium warocqueanum one that can get 3 to 4 feet long >and the > > >>smaller slender form with hardly any back lobes. They are >very > > >>noticeably different yet go by the exact same name. If one >was to > > >>order the plant under these name they could end up with >either form > > >>though one form of each is usually much more sought after.<< > >_______________________________________________ > >Aroid-l mailing list > >Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com > > http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > >_______________________________________________ >Aroid-l mailing list >Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com > http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l_______________________________________________Aroid-l mailing listAroid-l@gizmoworks.comhttp://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l Hermine Stover, SecretaryResponsible Dog Owners Of The Western States23280 StephaniePerris CA 92570310 925 8407 |\ _,,,---,,_ /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' ''Le Chat qui dort '---''(_/--' `-'\_) >_______________________________________________>Aroid-l mailing list>Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com>http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l _______________________________________________ Aroid-l mailing list Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l

From: "Wilbert Hetterscheid" <hetter at xs4all.nl> on 2007.03.20 at 06:13:27(15453) I KNEW that, I KNEW that................ >It was in honor of your MIND > Well, it is not my immediate business (the question > is not addressed to me), but this Australian Brugmansia guy is talking > about "gargantuan" Amorphophallus cultivar named after > me................. Somehow there is a (hardly) hidden hint in there. I > will send a lawyer upon everyone's feeble body who uses my name in > dishonour.............and this lawyer will clean you out in no > time!!!!!!!!!!!!! > > color=#0000ff size=2>  > > color=#0000ff size=2>Wilbert > > > > Van: aroid-l-bounces@gizmoworks.com > [mailto:aroid-l-bounces@gizmoworks.com] Namens > Hermine Verzonden: zondag 18 maart 2007 19:47 Aan: > Discussion of aroids Onderwerp: RE: [Aroid-l] Names for > different forms? > may I have permission to quote your remarks on cultivar > naming? hermine > I hesitate, with Wilbert and Gearoge's > great experience present here, to suggest how to move forward! But only > briefly lol. I don't mind being shot down in flames and will probably > learn something useful as I am currently up to the armpits in cultivar > registration for another group (Brugmansia) Given that this > has got off to false starts, I would strongly advocate not trying to > create an all-encompassing system first off: that looks to me as though it > would all fall over again. Adopt the KISS principle and get something > happening which can be improved in time. Also remember that > cultivar registration is voluntary: if the system created is onerous and > boring to comply with, people won't. An often-encountered > misunderstanding is that cultivar registration is equivalent to cultivar > naming, It is not. A cultivar can be named (i.e. > the name formally established) in almost any form of publication (bar > newspapers and a few other things (see 2004 Code)). So if you name a cv in > a printed nursery catalogue and there is even a one-word description of > it, and the publication is dated, the name is established provided it > meets some other technical requirements (which most cultivar epithets do). > Registration simply means that the ICRA accepts that the cultivar has been > properly named somewhere and has incorporated it into its Register (which > can be nothing more elaborate than an excel spreadsheet or even a > scrap-book!). The Registration process is there to assist the ICRA in > gathering the information it is responsible for managing. 1. As > ICRA for Aroids IAS sh/could (I suggest) devote some pages ("ICRA pages") > at the back of Aroideana to the publication of new cultivar names > (if this is not happening already - > sorry, I am out of touch!). Later these pages can also be used to publish > determinations on the validity of names where issues arise that need a > decision. A simple format for publishing a new cv is > Amorphophallus 'Wilbert's Surprise'   > [PHOTO] Seed parent: A. titanum (un-named clone); > Pollen parent: A. prainii (un-named > clone) Hybridiser: George W. Bush; Seedling Parent > [if different from hybridiser]: Tony Blair [OR > Discoverer: John Howard (if the cultivar has in effect been 'found' > - in the wild, as an accidental seedling, as a sport > etc] Origin: USA; Introduced: 2006 Salient > features: Spathe xxx, etc etc (keeping this to the minimum necessary > to capture the distinctive points). Note: this may evolve into > the bulk of a > registration form designed around different genera/tribes, but I > suggest do this when the need arises and when you know exactky why it is > needed rather than designing elaborate registration forms up > front. Name established: here [or if publishng a > cultivar whose name is established elsewhere, give the > reference.] IMO this covers the key stuff to start with. If > this (or something sinmilar) is adopted it may encourage people to publish > cultuvars in Aroideana rather than in obscure price lists printed off a > home PC - which is currently permitted under the 2004 Code and is a > $%^&#@ nuisance!. 2. An online Register is set up to, at first, > accommodate the new cultivars published in Aroideana with the same > information and pics, and to which are added all established cultivar > names in Araceae as they are gathered up by the Registrar and > anyone assisting over time! The online registry includes the > template for publishing new cvs in Aroideana (outlined above), and > Aroid-L, IAS website and perhaps Dave;s Garden are used to announce the > deadlines for submission of new cultivars for establishmens in Aroideana > each year. As the designated ICRA you are, I believe, responsible fior > providing this service to members and non-members alike. This seems > to me to be the minimum necessary to make this work. I have not discussed > nomenclatural standards and other recomendations of the Code, in the > belief that f you try to do it all perfectly at once it all just seems too > much! Apologes if you have been over all this > already!! A                 > > From:  "Julius Boos" <ju-bo@msn.com> > Reply-To:  Discussion of aroids > <aroid-l@gizmoworks.com> > To:  aroid-l@gizmoworks.com > Subject:  RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? > Date:  Thu, 15 Mar 2007 21:33:21 +0000 > > > > > >>From : Alistair Hay <ajmhay@hotmail.com> > >Reply-To : Discussion of aroids <aroid-l@gizmoworks.com> > >Sent : Thursday, March 15, 2007 12:14 AM > >To : aroid-l@gizmoworks.com > >Subject : RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? > > > >Dear aroid Friends, > > > >First off, thanks to my friends George Schmid, Wilbert > Hetterschied > >and Alistair Hay for their most informative comments on > registering > >cultivars. > >I wrote to the L on behalf of Brian Williams, so hopefully he is > > >better informed on what registering a cultivar > involves.   I guesss > >the NEXT big hurdle is---where does he register an aroid cultivar, > > >with whom, and HOW does he go about doing so!!  :--) > > > >Good Growing! > > > >Julius > > > >Pared down to the basics, the only salient part of a cultivar that > > >comes under the ICBN is the genus. The cultivar name at the > minimum > >consists of the genus name and the cv epithet. > > > >It does not matter all that much whether the plant is a selected > > >man-made hybrid or a selection from  a wild species or a > selection > >from a natural hybrid population. The thing that is to be named is > a > >clone, selected for some merit, within a genus. > > > >Thus: the gargantuan white-spathed Amorphophallus 'Wilbert's > >Surprise' can be  defined, named, established and registered > > >provided it is distinct from other cultivars of Amorphophallus, > > >uniform and stable  regardless of what species or hybrid it > is. Of > >course it would be nice to have the information that it is an f2 > > >hybrid of A. titanum and A. prainii, but that it not a necessary > > >piece of information to name the cv. [I have made this example up, > > >just in case anyone was wondering!]. > > > >The sort of problem that George raises would, I think, arise in > > >specific circumstances where there was an intention to transfer a > > >latin botanical epithet into a cultivar name. This can only be > done > >where the entire taxon is a clone. A possible example is Aliocasia > > >zebrina var tigrina: If it can be demonstrated that var. tigrina > is > >a clone then that botanical varietal epithet can become the > cultivar > >epithet as in Alocasia 'Tigrina'. If it is not clear whether var. > > >tigrina is a clone then there are simpler solutions than DNA and > > >field analysis. Either don't transfer the latin epithet at all, or > > >translate it into a contemporary language e.g. Alocasia 'Tigrine' > > >applied to the cultivated clone known now as "tigrina". That way > the > >exact status of the botanical variety does not need to be found > out > >at all, while a familiar name (slightly adjusted) can be retained > as > >a cultivar epithet. > > > >What I am getting at is that the issues which George raises, while > > >valid, should not necessarily create the impression of vast > hurdles > >to getting things going with Aroid cv classifictaion. > > > > > > > >Alistair > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >    From:  "W. George Schmid" > <hostahill@bellsouth.net> > >    Reply-To:  Discussion of aroids > <aroid-l@gizmoworks.com> > >    To:  "'Discussion of aroids'" > <aroid-l@gizmoworks.com> > >    Subject:  RE: [Aroid-l] Names for > different forms? > >    Date:  Wed, 14 Mar 2007 11:11:33 -0400 > >    > +More > >    >Julius, > >    >Some time ago we had an exchange on > registering aroid cultivars > >in > >    >accordance with the ICNCP (INTERNATIONAL > CODE OF NOMENCLATURE > >FOR CULTIVATED > >    >PLANTS 2004 edition). I made some > suggestions and Derek worked > >on this also. > >    >Perhaps we can refresh our previous > conversations and efforts. > >The problem I > >    >see in Araceae is to determine which aroids > are valid taxa to > >be handled > >    >under the ICBN and which are in fact > cultivated varieties > >(man-made hybrids) > >    >to be registered under the ICNCP. One of > the problems we had > >under Hosta > >    >were the numerous interspecific, natural > hybrids existing in > >the wild. We > >    >solved that problem by field investigations > and accepted such > >hybrids as > >    >taxa if perpetuating populations were found > to exist in the > >wild. In some > >    >cases, the holotypes were based on > cultivated plants > >purportedly collected > >    >in the wild, but lacking field verification > were reduced to > >cultivars under > >    >the ICNCP and so registered. From some of > the earlier messages > >I deduce that > >    >interspecific hybridization may also be a > problem with aroids. > >To determine > >    >synonymy, RAPD/DNA was employed to make the > differentiations. > >That is an > >    >expensive process, though. It seems to me > that a number of > >aroids in > >    >cultivation are not taxa (valid species) > but culta (cultivars). > >George > >    > > >    >W. George Schmid > >    >Hosta Hill R. G. > >    >USDA Zone 7a - 1188 feet (361m) AMSL > >    >84-12'-30" W 33-51' N > >    >All mail virus-scanned by McAfee > >    > > >    > > >    >-----Original Message----- > >    >From: aroid-l-bounces@gizmoworks.com > >[ > mailto:aroid-l-bounces@gizmoworks.com] > >    >On Behalf Of Julius Boos > >    >Sent: Tuesday, 13 March, 2007 17:28 > >    >To: aroid-l@gizmoworks.com > >    >Subject: RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different > forms? > >    > > >    > > >    > > >    > >From : Brian Williams > <pugturd@alltel.net> > >    >Reply-To : Discussion of aroids > <aroid-l@gizmoworks.com> > >    >Sent : Tuesday, March 13, 2007 3:20 AM > >    >To : Discussion of aroids > <aroid-l@gizmoworks.com> > >    >Subject : [Aroid-l] Names for different > forms? > >    > > >    > > >    >Dear Brian, > >    > > >    >This all goes back to an issue that to date > has not been > >'solved' by the > >    >aroid group, and which is a VERY difficult > issue, namely the > >cultivar names > >    >and the correct registering of these names > according to > >whatever > >    >horticultural rules/laws that may > apply. > >    >The IAS has nominated several people over > the past several > >years ( I can > >    >recall at least three)  to do > something about setting up some > >sort of > >    >registry to legitimize some or all of these > names which are > >being bantered > >    >about, but to date I think the progress on > instituting this > >system is not in > >    >place or even being worked on. > >    >I have mentioned on several occasions that > when man collectes a > >certain > >    >plant from nature, he usually selects one > which to him is the > >most > >    >attractive out of several hundred, maybe > thousands of other > >'less > >    >attractive' specimens he may see in the > field.   All of these > >plants, both > >    >the 'attractive' ones AND the less > attractive ones are still > >all variations > >    >of ONE species. > >    >All I can suggest at this time is that you > make a label that > >explains what > >    >the particular clone or var. of that plant > is, for example > >Philodendron > >    >stenolobum var. narrow/wavy/long leaf, > and/or P. stenolobum > >var. short and > >    >broad leaf, or 'Anthurium warocqueanum var. > Murline Lydon > >minature', vs. > >    >'Anthu. warocqueanum var. large leaf > '.   Collection data and > >collectors > >    >name would be another good bit of > information to keep with all > >wild > >    >collected plants. > >    >Perhaps Derek Burch can give some sort of > suggestion or > >soloution that may > >    >serve you guys better?? > >    > > >    >The  Best, > >    > > >    >Julius > >    > > >    > >>I have recently been trying to up > grade my data base of > >names as well > >    > >>as redo all my tags and make sure > everything has as much > >data and > >    > >>information as possible. I have a > few questions on forms. I > >know many > >    > >>plants have several forms of the > same species. I would like > >to know if > >    > >>their are names for these forms or > even if the science > >community really > >    >makes note of it? > >    > >>If not would putting a added > portion to the name to help ID > >different > >    > >>forms be possible? If so who > should come up with these name? > >Here are > >    > >>a few for instance off hand that I > really think should have > >some more > >    > >>information.  Their seems to > be two very different forms of > >Veitchii > >    > >>one with wider leaves and much > larger ripples. Then another > >form with > >    > >>thinner leaves and a much more > rippled effect. I know that > >naming all > >    > >>slight different forms would not > be worth while but for some > >very > >    > >>noticeable differences it could > help people know exactly > >what they are > >    > >>getting and their seems to be a > major price difference in > >one form > >    > >>compared to the other. Another one > that comes to mind is the > >two forms > >    > >>of Anthurium warocqueanum one that > can get 3 to 4 feet long > >and the > >    > >>smaller slender form with hardly > any back lobes. They are > >very > >    > >>noticeably different yet go by the > exact same name. If one > >was to > >    > >>order the plant under these name > they could end up with > >either form > >    > >>though one form of each is usually > much more sought after.<< > >    > >_______________________________________________ > >    >Aroid-l mailing list > >    >Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com > >    > > href="http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l"> > http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l > >    > > >    > > >    > >_______________________________________________ > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Aroid-l mailing list > >Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com > > > http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l _______________________________________________ Aroid-l > mailing list Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com > href="http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l">http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l > Hermine Stover, Secretary Responsible Dog Owners Of The Western > States 23280 Stephanie Perris CA 92570 310 925 > 8407    |\    > _,,,---,,_    /,`.-'`'    -.  > ;-;;,_   |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-' ''Le Chat qui > dort  '---''(_/--'  `-'\_) > >_______________________________________________ >Aroid-l > mailing > list >Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com >http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l > > > _______________________________________________ > Aroid-l mailing list > Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com > http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l > _______________________________________________ Aroid-l mailing list Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l

From: Hermine <hermine at endangeredspecies.com> on 2007.03.20 at 10:17:20(15454) At 01:44 PM 3/19/2007, you wrote: Ummm, to whiom?? LOL my sansevieria list which gets somewhat agitated over the whole issue of cultivar names. agitated and NERVOUS. I thought your take on the whole thimg was refreshing. Reply-To: Discussion of aroids To: Discussion of aroids Subject: RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2007 11:47:05 -0700 may I have permission to quote your remarks on cultivar naming? hermine +More I hesitate, with Wilbert and Gearoge's great experience present here, to suggest how to move forward! But only briefly lol. I don't mind being shot down in flames and will probably learn something useful as I am currently up to the armpits in cultivar registration for another group (Brugmansia) Given that this has got off to false starts, I would strongly advocate not trying to create an all-encompassing system first off: that looks to me as though it would all fall over again. Adopt the KISS principle and get something happening which can be improved in time. Also remember that cultivar registration is voluntary: if the system created is onerous and boring to comply with, people won't. An often-encountered misunderstanding is that cultivar registration is equivalent to cultivar naming, It is not. A cultivar can be named (i.e. the name formally established) in almost any form of publication (bar newspapers and a few other things (see 2004 Code)). So if you name a cv in a printed nursery catalogue and there is even a one-word description of it, and the publication is dated, the name is established provided it meets some other technical requirements (which most cultivar epithets do). Registration simply means that the ICRA accepts that the cultivar has been properly named somewhere and has incorporated it into its Register (which can be nothing more elaborate than an excel spreadsheet or even a scrap-book!). The Registration process is there to assist the ICRA in gathering the information it is responsible for managing. 1. As ICRA for Aroids IAS sh/could (I suggest) devote some pages ("ICRA pages") at the back of Aroideana to the publication of new cultivar names (if this is not happening already - sorry, I am out of touch!). Later these pages can also be used to publish determinations on the validity of names where issues arise that need a decision. A simple format for publishing a new cv is Amorphophallus 'Wilbert's Surprise' [PHOTO] Seed parent: A. titanum (un-named clone); Pollen parent: A. prainii (un-named clone) Hybridiser: George W. Bush; Seedling Parent [if different from hybridiser]: Tony Blair [OR Discoverer: John Howard (if the cultivar has in effect been 'found' - in the wild, as an accidental seedling, as a sport etc] Origin: USA; Introduced: 2006 Salient features: Spathe xxx, etc etc (keeping this to the minimum necessary to capture the distinctive points). Note: this may evolve into the bulk of a registration form designed around different genera/tribes, but I suggest do this when the need arises and when you know exactky why it is needed rather than designing elaborate registration forms up front. Name established: here [or if publishng a cultivar whose name is established elsewhere, give the reference.] IMO this covers the key stuff to start with. If this (or something sinmilar) is adopted it may encourage people to publish cultuvars in Aroideana rather than in obscure price lists printed off a home PC - which is currently permitted under the 2004 Code and is a $%^&#@ nuisance!. 2. An online Register is set up to, at first, accommodate the new cultivars published in Aroideana with the same information and pics, and to which are added all established cultivar names in Araceae as they are gathered up by the Registrar and anyone assisting over time! The online registry includes the template for publishing new cvs in Aroideana (outlined above), and Aroid-L, IAS website and perhaps Dave;s Garden are used to announce the deadlines for submission of new cultivars for establishmens in Aroideana each year. As the designated ICRA you are, I believe, responsible fior providing this service to members and non-members alike. This seems to me to be the minimum necessary to make this work. I have not discussed nomenclatural standards and other recomendations of the Code, in the belief that f you try to do it all perfectly at once it all just seems too much! Apologes if you have been over all this already!! A From: "Julius Boos" Reply-To: Discussion of aroids To: aroid-l@gizmoworks.com Subject: RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 21:33:21 +0000 > > >>From : Alistair Hay >Reply-To : Discussion of aroids >Sent : Thursday, March 15, 2007 12:14 AM >To : aroid-l@gizmoworks.com >Subject : RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? > >Dear aroid Friends, > >First off, thanks to my friends George Schmid, Wilbert Hetterschied >and Alistair Hay for their most informative comments on registering >cultivars. >I wrote to the L on behalf of Brian Williams, so hopefully he is >better informed on what registering a cultivar involves. I guesss >the NEXT big hurdle is---where does he register an aroid cultivar, >with whom, and HOW does he go about doing so!! :--) > >Good Growing! > >Julius > >Pared down to the basics, the only salient part of a cultivar that >comes under the ICBN is the genus. The cultivar name at the minimum >consists of the genus name and the cv epithet. > >It does not matter all that much whether the plant is a selected >man-made hybrid or a selection from a wild species or a selection >from a natural hybrid population. The thing that is to be named is a >clone, selected for some merit, within a genus. > >Thus: the gargantuan white-spathed Amorphophallus 'Wilbert's >Surprise' can be defined, named, established and registered >provided it is distinct from other cultivars of Amorphophallus, >uniform and stable regardless of what species or hybrid it is. Of >course it would be nice to have the information that it is an f2 >hybrid of A. titanum and A. prainii, but that it not a necessary >piece of information to name the cv. [I have made this example up, >just in case anyone was wondering!]. > >The sort of problem that George raises would, I think, arise in >specific circumstances where there was an intention to transfer a >latin botanical epithet into a cultivar name. This can only be done >where the entire taxon is a clone. A possible example is Aliocasia >zebrina var tigrina: If it can be demonstrated that var. tigrina is >a clone then that botanical varietal epithet can become the cultivar >epithet as in Alocasia 'Tigrina'. If it is not clear whether var. >tigrina is a clone then there are simpler solutions than DNA and >field analysis. Either don't transfer the latin epithet at all, or >translate it into a contemporary language e.g. Alocasia 'Tigrine' >applied to the cultivated clone known now as "tigrina". That way the >exact status of the botanical variety does not need to be found out >at all, while a familiar name (slightly adjusted) can be retained as >a cultivar epithet. > >What I am getting at is that the issues which George raises, while >valid, should not necessarily create the impression of vast hurdles >to getting things going with Aroid cv classifictaion. > > > >Alistair > > > > > > > > > > From: "W. George Schmid" > Reply-To: Discussion of aroids > To: "'Discussion of aroids'" > Subject: RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? > Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 11:11:33 -0400 > > > >Julius, > >Some time ago we had an exchange on registering aroid cultivars >in > >accordance with the ICNCP (INTERNATIONAL CODE OF NOMENCLATURE >FOR CULTIVATED > >PLANTS 2004 edition). I made some suggestions and Derek worked >on this also. > >Perhaps we can refresh our previous conversations and efforts. >The problem I > >see in Araceae is to determine which aroids are valid taxa to >be handled > >under the ICBN and which are in fact cultivated varieties >(man-made hybrids) > >to be registered under the ICNCP. One of the problems we had >under Hosta > >were the numerous interspecific, natural hybrids existing in >the wild. We > >solved that problem by field investigations and accepted such >hybrids as > >taxa if perpetuating populations were found to exist in the >wild. In some > >cases, the holotypes were based on cultivated plants >purportedly collected > >in the wild, but lacking field verification were reduced to >cultivars under > >the ICNCP and so registered. From some of the earlier messages >I deduce that > >interspecific hybridization may also be a problem with aroids. >To determine > >synonymy, RAPD/DNA was employed to make the differentiations. >That is an > >expensive process, though. It seems to me that a number of >aroids in > >cultivation are not taxa (valid species) but culta (cultivars). >George > > > >W. George Schmid > >Hosta Hill R. G. > >USDA Zone 7a - 1188 feet (361m) AMSL > >84-12'-30" W 33-51' N > >All mail virus-scanned by McAfee > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: aroid-l-bounces@gizmoworks.com >[ mailto:aroid-l-bounces@gizmoworks.com] > >On Behalf Of Julius Boos > >Sent: Tuesday, 13 March, 2007 17:28 > >To: aroid-l@gizmoworks.com > >Subject: RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? > > > > > > > > >From : Brian Williams > >Reply-To : Discussion of aroids > >Sent : Tuesday, March 13, 2007 3:20 AM > >To : Discussion of aroids > >Subject : [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? > > > > > >Dear Brian, > > > >This all goes back to an issue that to date has not been >'solved' by the > >aroid group, and which is a VERY difficult issue, namely the >cultivar names > >and the correct registering of these names according to >whatever > >horticultural rules/laws that may apply. > >The IAS has nominated several people over the past several >years ( I can > >recall at least three) to do something about setting up some >sort of > >registry to legitimize some or all of these names which are >being bantered > >about, but to date I think the progress on instituting this >system is not in > >place or even being worked on. > >I have mentioned on several occasions that when man collectes a >certain > >plant from nature, he usually selects one which to him is the >most > >attractive out of several hundred, maybe thousands of other >'less > >attractive' specimens he may see in the field. All of these >plants, both > >the 'attractive' ones AND the less attractive ones are still >all variations > >of ONE species. > >All I can suggest at this time is that you make a label that >explains what > >the particular clone or var. of that plant is, for example >Philodendron > >stenolobum var. narrow/wavy/long leaf, and/or P. stenolobum >var. short and > >broad leaf, or 'Anthurium warocqueanum var. Murline Lydon >minature', vs. > >'Anthu. warocqueanum var. large leaf '. Collection data and >collectors > >name would be another good bit of information to keep with all >wild > >collected plants. > >Perhaps Derek Burch can give some sort of suggestion or >soloution that may > >serve you guys better?? > > > >The Best, > > > >Julius > > > > >>I have recently been trying to up grade my data base of >names as well > > >>as redo all my tags and make sure everything has as much >data and > > >>information as possible. I have a few questions on forms. I >know many > > >>plants have several forms of the same species. I would like >to know if > > >>their are names for these forms or even if the science >community really > >makes note of it? > > >>If not would putting a added portion to the name to help ID >different > > >>forms be possible? If so who should come up with these name? >Here are > > >>a few for instance off hand that I really think should have >some more > > >>information. Their seems to be two very different forms of >Veitchii > > >>one with wider leaves and much larger ripples. Then another >form with > > >>thinner leaves and a much more rippled effect. I know that >naming all > > >>slight different forms would not be worth while but for some >very > > >>noticeable differences it could help people know exactly >what they are > > >>getting and their seems to be a major price difference in >one form > > >>compared to the other. Another one that comes to mind is the >two forms > > >>of Anthurium warocqueanum one that can get 3 to 4 feet long >and the > > >>smaller slender form with hardly any back lobes. They are >very > > >>noticeably different yet go by the exact same name. If one >was to > > >>order the plant under these name they could end up with >either form > > >>though one form of each is usually much more sought after.<< > >_______________________________________________ > >Aroid-l mailing list > >Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com > > http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > >_______________________________________________ >Aroid-l mailing list >Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com > http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l _______________________________________________ Aroid-l mailing list Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l Hermine Stover, Secretary Responsible Dog Owners Of The Western States 23280 Stephanie Perris CA 92570 310 925 8407 |\ _,,,---,,_ /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' ''Le Chat qui dort '---''(_/--' `-'\_) >_______________________________________________ >Aroid-l mailing list >Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com > http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l _______________________________________________ Aroid-l mailing list Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l Hermine Stover, Secretary Responsible Dog Owners Of The Western States 23280 Stephanie Perris CA 92570 310 925 8407 |\ _,,,---,,_ /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' ''Le Chat qui dort '---''(_/--' `-'\_) _______________________________________________ Aroid-l mailing list Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l

From: piaba <piabinha at yahoo.com> on 2007.03.21 at 15:07:41(15459) these are fighting words, my friend, i hope you know that. Brugmansia, of course... +More ========= tsuh yang ____________________________________________________________________________________ Don't get soaked. Take a quick peek at the forecast with the Yahoo! Search weather shortcut. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/shortcuts/#loc_weather _______________________________________________ Aroid-l mailing list Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l

From: "Alistair Hay" <ajmhay at hotmail.com> on 2007.03.22 at 20:59:21(15465) You are welcome to do so. But I suggest first seeking Wilbert's opinion as Lord High Chamberlain of Coltonomy! Ummm, to whiom?? LOLmy sansevieria list which gets somewhat agitated over the whole issue of cultivar names. agitated and NERVOUS. I thought your take on the whole thimg was refreshing. Reply-To: Discussion of aroids To: Discussion of aroids Subject: RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2007 11:47:05 -0700 may I have permission to quote your remarks on cultivar naming? hermine +More I hesitate, with Wilbert and Gearoge's great experience present here, to suggest how to move forward! But only briefly lol. I don't mind being shot down in flames and will probably learn something useful as I am currently up to the armpits in cultivar registration for another group (Brugmansia) Given that this has got off to false starts, I would strongly advocate not trying to create an all-encompassing system first off: that looks to me as though it would all fall over again. Adopt the KISS principle and get something happening which can be improved in time. Also remember that cultivar registration is voluntary: if the system created is onerous and boring to comply with, people won't. An often-encountered misunderstanding is that cultivar registration is equivalent to cultivar naming, It is not. A cultivar can be named (i.e. the name formally established) in almost any form of publication (bar newspapers and a few other things (see 2004 Code)). So if you name a cv in a printed nursery catalogue and there is even a one-word description of it, and the publication is dated, the name is established provided it meets some other technical requirements (which most cultivar epithets do). Registration simply means that the ICRA accepts that the cultivar has been properly named somewhere and has incorporated it into its Register (which can be nothing more elaborate than an excel spreadsheet or even a scrap-book!). The Registration process is there to assist the ICRA in gathering the information it is responsible for managing. 1. As ICRA for Aroids IAS sh/could (I suggest) devote some pages ("ICRA pages") at the back of Aroideana to the publication of new cultivar names (if this is not happening already - sorry, I am out of touch!). Later these pages can also be used to publish determinations on the validity of names where issues arise that need a decision. A simple format for publishing a new cv is Amorphophallus 'Wilbert's Surprise' [PHOTO] Seed parent: A. titanum (un-named clone); Pollen parent: A. prainii (un-named clone) Hybridiser: George W. Bush; Seedling Parent [if different from hybridiser]: Tony Blair [OR Discoverer: John Howard (if the cultivar has in effect been 'found' - in the wild, as an accidental seedling, as a sport etc] Origin: USA; Introduced: 2006 Salient features: Spathe xxx, etc etc (keeping this to the minimum necessary to capture the distinctive points). Note: this may evolve into the bulk of a registration form designed around different genera/tribes, but I suggest do this when the need arises and when you know exactky why it is needed rather than designing elaborate registration forms up front. Name established: here [or if publishng a cultivar whose name is established elsewhere, give the reference.] IMO this covers the key stuff to start with. If this (or something sinmilar) is adopted it may encourage people to publish cultuvars in Aroideana rather than in obscure price lists printed off a home PC - which is currently permitted under the 2004 Code and is a $%^&#@ nuisance!. 2. An online Register is set up to, at first, accommodate the new cultivars published in Aroideana with the same information and pics, and to which are added all established cultivar names in Araceae as they are gathered up by the Registrar and anyone assisting over time! The online registry includes the template for publishing new cvs in Aroideana (outlined above), and Aroid-L, IAS website and perhaps Dave;s Garden are used to announce the deadlines for submission of new cultivars for establishmens in Aroideana each year. As the designated ICRA you are, I believe, responsible fior providing this service to members and non-members alike. This seems to me to be the minimum necessary to make this work. I have not discussed nomenclatural standards and other recomendations of the Code, in the belief that f you try to do it all perfectly at once it all just seems too much! Apologes if you have been over all this already!! A From: "Julius Boos" Reply-To: Discussion of aroids To: aroid-l@gizmoworks.com Subject: RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 21:33:21 +0000 > > >>From : Alistair Hay >Reply-To : Discussion of aroids >Sent : Thursday, March 15, 2007 12:14 AM >To : aroid-l@gizmoworks.com >Subject : RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? > >Dear aroid Friends, > >First off, thanks to my friends George Schmid, Wilbert Hetterschied >and Alistair Hay for their most informative comments on registering >cultivars. >I wrote to the L on behalf of Brian Williams, so hopefully he is >better informed on what registering a cultivar involves. I guesss >the NEXT big hurdle is---where does he register an aroid cultivar, >with whom, and HOW does he go about doing so!! :--) > >Good Growing! > >Julius > >Pared down to the basics, the only salient part of a cultivar that >comes under the ICBN is the genus. The cultivar name at the minimum >consists of the genus name and the cv epithet. > >It does not matter all that much whether the plant is a selected >man-made hybrid or a selection from a wild species or a selection >from a natural hybrid population. The thing that is to be named is a >clone, selected for some merit, within a genus. > >Thus: the gargantuan white-spathed Amorphophallus 'Wilbert's >Surprise' can be defined, named, established and registered >provided it is distinct from other cultivars of Amorphophallus, >uniform and stable regardless of what species or hybrid it is. Of >course it would be nice to have the information that it is an f2 >hybrid of A. titanum and A. prainii, but that it not a necessary >piece of information to name the cv. [I have made this example up, >just in case anyone was wondering!]. > >The sort of problem that George raises would, I think, arise in >specific circumstances where there was an intention to transfer a >latin botanical epithet into a cultivar name. This can only be done >where the entire taxon is a clone. A possible example is Aliocasia >zebrina var tigrina: If it can be demonstrated that var. tigrina is >a clone then that botanical varietal epithet can become the cultivar >epithet as in Alocasia 'Tigrina'. If it is not clear whether var. >tigrina is a clone then there are simpler solutions than DNA and >field analysis. Either don't transfer the latin epithet at all, or >translate it into a contemporary language e.g. Alocasia 'Tigrine' >applied to the cultivated clone known now as "tigrina". That way the >exact status of the botanical variety does not need to be found out >at all, while a familiar name (slightly adjusted) can be retained as >a cultivar epithet. > >What I am getting at is that the issues which George raises, while >valid, should not necessarily create the impression of vast hurdles >to getting things going with Aroid cv classifictaion. > > > >Alistair > > > > > > > > > > From: "W. George Schmid" > Reply-To: Discussion of aroids > To: "'Discussion of aroids'" > Subject: RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? > Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 11:11:33 -0400 > > > >Julius, > >Some time ago we had an exchange on registering aroid cultivars >in > >accordance with the ICNCP (INTERNATIONAL CODE OF NOMENCLATURE >FOR CULTIVATED > >PLANTS 2004 edition). I made some suggestions and Derek worked >on this also. > >Perhaps we can refresh our previous conversations and efforts. >The problem I > >see in Araceae is to determine which aroids are valid taxa to >be handled > >under the ICBN and which are in fact cultivated varieties >(man-made hybrids) > >to be registered under the ICNCP. One of the problems we had >under Hosta > >were the numerous interspecific, natural hybrids existing in >the wild. We > >solved that problem by field investigations and accepted such >hybrids as > >taxa if perpetuating populations were found to exist in the >wild. In some > >cases, the holotypes were based on cultivated plants >purportedly collected > >in the wild, but lacking field verification were reduced to >cultivars under > >the ICNCP and so registered. From some of the earlier messages >I deduce that > >interspecific hybridization may also be a problem with aroids. >To determine > >synonymy, RAPD/DNA was employed to make the differentiations. >That is an > >expensive process, though. It seems to me that a number of >aroids in > >cultivation are not taxa (valid species) but culta (cultivars). >George > > > >W. George Schmid > >Hosta Hill R. G. > >USDA Zone 7a - 1188 feet (361m) AMSL > >84-12'-30" W 33-51' N > >All mail virus-scanned by McAfee > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: aroid-l-bounces@gizmoworks.com >[ mailto:aroid-l-bounces@gizmoworks.com] > >On Behalf Of Julius Boos > >Sent: Tuesday, 13 March, 2007 17:28 > >To: aroid-l@gizmoworks.com > >Subject: RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? > > > > > > > > >From : Brian Williams > >Reply-To : Discussion of aroids > >Sent : Tuesday, March 13, 2007 3:20 AM > >To : Discussion of aroids > >Subject : [Aroid-l] Names for different forms? > > > > > >Dear Brian, > > > >This all goes back to an issue that to date has not been >'solved' by the > >aroid group, and which is a VERY difficult issue, namely the >cultivar names > >and the correct registering of these names according to >whatever > >horticultural rules/laws that may apply. > >The IAS has nominated several people over the past several >years ( I can > >recall at least three) to do something about setting up some >sort of > >registry to legitimize some or all of these names which are >being bantered > >about, but to date I think the progress on instituting this >system is not in > >place or even being worked on. > >I have mentioned on several occasions that when man collectes a >certain > >plant from nature, he usually selects one which to him is the >most > >attractive out of several hundred, maybe thousands of other >'less > >attractive' specimens he may see in the field. All of these >plants, both > >the 'attractive' ones AND the less attractive ones are still >all variations > >of ONE species. > >All I can suggest at this time is that you make a label that >explains what > >the particular clone or var. of that plant is, for example >Philodendron > >stenolobum var. narrow/wavy/long leaf, and/or P. stenolobum >var. short and > >broad leaf, or 'Anthurium warocqueanum var. Murline Lydon >minature', vs. > >'Anthu. warocqueanum var. large leaf '. Collection data and >collectors > >name would be another good bit of information to keep with all >wild > >collected plants. > >Perhaps Derek Burch can give some sort of suggestion or >soloution that may > >serve you guys better?? > > > >The Best, > > > >Julius > > > > >>I have recently been trying to up grade my data base of >names as well > > >>as redo all my tags and make sure everything has as much >data and > > >>information as possible. I have a few questions on forms. I >know many > > >>plants have several forms of the same species. I would like >to know if > > >>their are names for these forms or even if the science >community really > >makes note of it? > > >>If not would putting a added portion to the name to help ID >different > > >>forms be possible? If so who should come up with these name? >Here are > > >>a few for instance off hand that I really think should have >some more > > >>information. Their seems to be two very different forms of >Veitchii > > >>one with wider leaves and much larger ripples. Then another >form with > > >>thinner leaves and a much more rippled effect. I know that >naming all > > >>slight different forms would not be worth while but for some >very > > >>noticeable differences it could help people know exactly >what they are > > >>getting and their seems to be a major price difference in >one form > > >>compared to the other. Another one that comes to mind is the >two forms > > >>of Anthurium warocqueanum one that can get 3 to 4 feet long >and the > > >>smaller slender form with hardly any back lobes. They are >very > > >>noticeably different yet go by the exact same name. If one >was to > > >>order the plant under these name they could end up with >either form > > >>though one form of each is usually much more sought after.<< > >_______________________________________________ > >Aroid-l mailing list > >Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com > > http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > >_______________________________________________ >Aroid-l mailing list >Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com > http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l _______________________________________________ Aroid-l mailing list Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l Hermine Stover, Secretary Responsible Dog Owners Of The Western States 23280 Stephanie Perris CA 92570 310 925 8407 |\ _,,,---,,_ /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' ''Le Chat qui dort '---''(_/--' `-'\_) >_______________________________________________ >Aroid-l mailing list >Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com > http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l_______________________________________________Aroid-l mailing listAroid-l@gizmoworks.comhttp://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l Hermine Stover, SecretaryResponsible Dog Owners Of The Western States23280 StephaniePerris CA 92570310 925 8407 |\ _,,,---,,_ /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' ''Le Chat qui dort '---''(_/--' `-'\_) >_______________________________________________>Aroid-l mailing list>Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com>http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l _______________________________________________ Aroid-l mailing list Aroid-l@gizmoworks.com http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l

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