Re: [Aroid-l] Intrageneric crossing - a good reference

From: "Peter Boyce" botanist at malesiana.com> on 2006.02.02 at 20:54:03(13801) Hi Hermine At the risk of boring a large percentage of aroid-l subscribers, since this isn't a forum to discuss evolutionary systematics (phylogenetics), I'm all in favour of making systematic studies to better understand plant relationships based on their evolutionary lineages and strongly advocate this type of study rather then the former method of 'it looks similar thus it must be related' approach to sysematics; what worries me is the number of students veering directly to the lab. to do their work while, conservatively, a third of all living things have yet to receive a scientific name. Pete +More ----- Original Message ----- To: "Discussion of aroids" ; "Discussion of aroids" Sent: Monday, January 30, 2006 4:55 PM Subject: Re: [Aroid-l] Intrageneric crossing - a good reference At 12:01 AM 1/30/2006, Peter Boyce wrote: Hermine Just to make you even MORE scared, most people don't even put Sanseveria in the Liliaceae any more... THIS IS HERESY. I do not even want to HEAR about this. What frustrates me about all the efforts expended on family shuffling & debating is that, e.g., c. 65% of the aroids of Borneo have yet to receive even ONE name! well, it just goes to show that agreement is getting rare! 2/3rds of the names for Palms commonly grown in gardens, have changed entirely since a book listing them, published in 1947. A person almost asks, what is the POINT? One of the other things I ponder is why is Clivia listed as a bulb? hermine _______________________________________________ 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.