Re: The 3 Horsemen of the Apocalypse

From: Endangered Species <especies at ix.netcom.com> on 1996.12.28 at 05:38:46(12) At 09:49 PM 12/27/96 -0600, James W. Waddick wrote: >Dear Aroiders and especially Ray and Wilbert; > I have been biting my lip over all this taxonomy talk, but Ray's >comment on a "Rose by any other name" sort of got to me. Ray do you mean a >"Rosa", "Rhodondendron", "Aptenia"," Arethusa" or any of the other twenty + >genera listed under "Rose" in Hortus III? > We aroid-lers forget sometimes we are an elite group and throw >around generic names like common names. So we can loosely call an Arum an >Arum -but not by any other name. > In the professional world of looking at plants and their names >there are "3 Horsemen of the Apocalypse" - activities which amateurs tend >to combine, confuse or synonomize - Systematics, Taxonomy and Nomenclature. > > In the best of all possible worlds, these are harmonius and reflect >the real world. Where the commmon name, scientific name and the meaning of >the name are clear, solid and unconfusing; however I can't think of an >example off hand. Isn't there some monotypic genus that is common and a >household word? +More >[My favorite mis-nomer here is "Nasturtium" (italics, please) the generic >name of the Water Cress. The common name Nasturtium is of course, >Tropaeolum (italics)- a serious historical confusion.] > > Anyway, every taxonomist, must justify their placement of a name on >a biological entity using the tools of systematics and an understanding of >the rules of Nomenclature (at least we have the "International Code for >Botanical Nomenclature"[ICBN] as a guide to this aspect of the problem). >The more the relationships of names resembles the realities of nature, the >more "sensible" a system of relationships is explained, the more likely the >names will be understood and accepted by science and amateur gardeners >alike. > Without going into all the vagaries and excpetions - and there are >way too many -...and to get to the point.. Wilbert's proposed name change >reflects his view of the relationships of one species to a number of >others. Once he has published his reason for this view, the acceptance of >any changes is out there hanging in the breeze. > Gardeners and especially anyone commercially involved in a name >change are hard audiences to budge. The scientific community may >immediatley say "AHA! and Of Course", but it may still take decades or >never to get changes/corections into the main stream. > > As a dabbler in the world of professional taxonomy and systematics, >I think it is awfully brave of Wilbert to just throw out his proposal to >the mixed bag or aroid-lers. Gardeners who don't want to change their label >for any reason., nurserymen who won't order new labels for all the ir >plants-customers don't even want to know any scientific name-let alone a >new one and...well etc etc. etc. > > I am also impressed at how well some aroid-lers understand the >subtleties of the problem and others just don't fathom all the troubles >here. Quite a mixed bag. > > I say, lete's give Wilbert the time to give us the facts when their >time is right, then let another botanist propose a more sensible >alternative - or hopefully not again! > > Best wishes for a Happy New Year to all > > > Jim W. > > >ps There is no Dark "SIDE" of taxonomy , it is all "DARK"- Arcane spells, >demons in laboratories and mystical languages. You must be trained in the >use of The Force... or just belive. > >James L. Murrain Voice: 816 746 1949 >James W. Waddick E-MAIL: jimjim@sky.net >8871 NW Brostrom Rd Fax: 816 746 1939 >Kansas City MO 64152 > > > > > The fourth horseman is Tonto Hermine

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