Re: Re:Nepenthes naming

From: dave evans (T442119@RUTADMIN.RUTGERS.EDU)
Date: Fri Feb 21 1997 - 16:38:00 PST


Date:    Fri, 21 Feb 97 19:38 EST
From: dave evans                           <T442119@RUTADMIN.RUTGERS.EDU>
To: cp@opus.hpl.hp.com
Message-Id: <aabcdefg682$foo@default>
Subject: Re: Re:Nepenthes naming

Hello Jan,

> So you have the problem here that you do not agree with the author s
> original intention.

I suppose so. But then I still don't understand why a Nepenthes
would get a cultivar name at all... Perhaps if a plant were to
produce double pitchers reliably or by a very different color
or something. The plant I want to name has nothing which indicates
a cultivar name would be applicable, unless it has some marvelous
temperture restantance which the rest of the cross didn't that
I don't know about. I never saw the issue of CPN within which
it was named, so I'm not sure why it supposed to be a cultivar...

> This would not be any problem. Most cultivars were named after their
> breeders, not by the breeders themselves.

So, because someone made it, it gets their name? Doesn't sound
quite right to me, if applied as generally as it seems.

> Cultivars do not need to be described in a protologue (no
> Latin, no type, no taxonomic relevance).

Ok, I now understand this bit (but disagree completely). Why
aren't the wild Nepenthes hybrid names on the list valid then?
I see that N. * hookeriana and N. * tricocarpa are not valid.
Why? They are aren't manmade but I didn't see any note about
the name's status like, "nom.nud.."

> Impossible with hybrids of horticultural origin.

Is there any real reason for this? I mean, is this a rule? It
seems a bit misguided here, if it is. So then, in order to name
a new cross, it must be a cultivar by default? But cultivars
can't be applied to more than one individual clone and hybrids
can be made over and over and have millions of seperate clones.
How about a horticultural hybrid naming system? To keep it's
"value" seperate from the "real" names. As it stands now, people
must keep naming plants as cultivars that shouldn't be named as such.
In other words, the current rules, as I understand them, are not
working.

Dave Evans



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Jan 02 2001 - 17:30:59 PST