Re: too much 'Kosobe'!

From: SCHLAUER@chemie.uni-wuerzburg.de
Date: Mon Jan 20 1997 - 07:53:29 PST

Next message: Fernando Rivadavia: "Re: U.arenaria"
Previous message: Hurrellaj@aol.com: "Any Nepenthes enthusiasts in E. Malaysia?"
Maybe in reply to: SCHLAUER@chemie.uni-wuerzburg.de: "too much 'Kosobe'!"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Date:          Mon, 20 Jan 1997 07:53:29 
From: SCHLAUER@chemie.uni-wuerzburg.de
To: cp@opus.hpl.hp.com
Message-Id: <aabcdefg272$foo@default>
Subject:       Re: too much 'Kosobe'!

Dear Dave,

> Me either! But then, I have not seen a plant labled N. * stewartii...
> I'm assuming the plant I have is from the later cross which was
> then named N. * wrigleyana. So should I just lable it N. * stewartii
> or N. * stewartii cv. 'Wrigleyana'? Like you said, these later
> names could be used as cultivar names since they were published
> before the rules were, uh, "clarified".

The rules we are talking about at the moment were first established in
1953. The plants concerned were described more than fifty years
earlier.

> So do I follow the rules and use a name nobody's heard of or do I
> ignore them like most everyone else (so it seems).

This is your decision. I can only tell you what (IMHO) the rules would
recommend you to do. Nobody can be forced to follow the rules but at
the same time noone can force me to accept bogus from "outlaws".

Kind regards
Jan

Next message: Fernando Rivadavia: "Re: U.arenaria"
Previous message: Hurrellaj@aol.com: "Any Nepenthes enthusiasts in E. Malaysia?"
Maybe in reply to: SCHLAUER@chemie.uni-wuerzburg.de: "too much 'Kosobe'!"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Jan 02 2001 - 17:30:58 PST