Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 09:39:08 From: SCHLAUER@chemie.uni-wuerzburg.de To: cp@opus.hpl.hp.com Message-Id: <aabcdefg709$foo@default> Subject: Re: On cultivars
Dear Peter & al.,
> There is, of course, another problem, which ICPS has not yet addressed,
> and the problem is a large one.
This is a matter of opinion. I do not think that there is any such
problem at all (see below).
> I discussed this during my lecture at the
> 1997 International meeting in Atlanta, and I go into quite a bit in my book.
> So far, ICPS only registers CULTIVARS, and not simply new crosses, as does
> more organized and established hobbies as orchids. When a new hybrid is
> produced, if it is the first time such a cross was made, then it should be
> published and registered with a fancy non-Latin name.
The nomenclature of cultivated orchids is different from all other
cultivated plants because the "grex" has some other (higher)
significance. An equivalent for grex (which is only applicable for
orchids according to ICNCP 1995) is the cultivar group. Contrary to
what has been stated, cultivar groups have in fact been established
also for (some) cps (Fleming, CPN 8:10-12, 1979).
> Thereafter, anyone
> duplicating the cross would always call it by that name.
This is a misunderstanding quite frequently encountered. It is,
however, *not* at all mandatory to use cultivar group designations if
a hybrid by a given formula is repeated and one or several plants
resulting therefrom are selected as cultivars. The assignment of a
given cultivar to a given cultivar group is essentially a personal
decision by the registrant or by any other person who is interested
in these issues. The reason for this assignment does not even need to
be similar parentage but can e.g. be a common colouration feature
(a Green Pitcher Group of _Sarracenia_ is conceivable, including a
cultivar of _S. p. heterophylla_ and anthocyanin-free or -poor plants
of other species).
> If a particular
> plant from that cross warranted distinction, enough to be propagated
> vegatatively to preserve its uniqueness, then that particular plant would be
> given a cultivar status and published further.
I cannot imagine a cultivar group to be established if it does not
include at least one cultivar. So your "particular plant" must be
present and should be described and published *before* the cultivar
group is established.
> Currently ICPS does not do
> this, as it only registers cultivars, and not new crosses.
Wrong (see reference above). It is true, however, that we cannot
publish what is not submitted to us for publication. Cultivar group
names have to be established like cultivar names (by registrants,
not by registrars), they are *not* created automatically by the IRA,
and it is also not the job of an IRA to perform cultivar group
assignments.
NB: A registrant is a person who *submits* cultivar data for
registration of a cultivar name to a registration authority. A
registrar is a person who is authorized by a registration authority to
accept these data and who keeps a register of these names.
> Frankly, if
> anyone were to tackle this job, and backtrack and trace down all hybrids so
> far done, and find out who did them and when ... well, as you can see this
> would be a daunting task that just might drive one to suicide. So as it is,
> only cultivars are published by ICPS.
Presently, we are fighting very hard (and, IMHO, quite successfully
so) to accumulate all the necessary information (no suicides so far),
but support from the horticultural trade has been moderate. Especially
"outlaw" cultivators who keep publishing (just mentioning a name in a
book *is* a publication; it is *not* a cultivar description or even an
establishment of the name) new names without descriptions complicate
the job to a considerable degree. In the future, only registered
names will be established (or acceptable), but the forthcoming
International Register of cultivated carnivorous plants will include
all names that have been published, i.e. also the unacceptable, not
established ones. There is no law to punish persons who do not stick
to the internationally agreed rules of cultivated plant nomenclature,
so we can only brand their names as unacceptable in the Register. In
this respect, the International Register will at the same time be an
invitation to all cp cultivators to register their names and the
stocks for those who have published names without registration.
Kind regards
Jan
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Jan 02 2001 - 17:31:29 PST