Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 17:08:25 -0800 (PST) From: Barry Meyers-Rice <bamrice@ucdavis.edu> To: cp@opus.hpl.hp.com Message-Id: <aabcdefg848$foo@default> Subject: Randall's potential Cultivar
> Jan
> It was over two years ago, that Bob Sundew and I went down to Ft.
> Myers, to see a carnivorous collection that one of his friends had. In
> the trip a plant with a taxon
> (do I have the term right) rubragulfensis *psittacina came into my
> posession. Although it didn't have a Cultivar name it still is a neat
> looking plant. Would a plant like this qualify as a cultivar.
Randall,
Barry Meyers-Rice here (another CPN coeditor)...
Yes, your Sarracenia rubra gulfensis x psittacina might be a really neat
looking plant, but aren't all Sarracenia? There is no reason you can't
make this plant a cultivar, but is it really worth being a cultivar? A
cultivar should be an outstanding plant. I am attached to all my plants
and care about them, but think that cultivars should be the finest of the
fine. Is your plant special when compared to other S. rubra gulfensis x
psittacina plants?
I also think that a cultivar plant should be propagated into several
specimens and should be in at least a few people's collections (instead of
a single plant in one person's collection). What a pity it would be for a
cultivar to be described and then wiped off the planet because the only
plant died.
These are my own opinions---the cultivar code says you could name just
about anything you want, even a plant which is bland and
featureless, impressive only for the way it succumbs to disease and pests!
Barry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Jan 02 2001 - 17:31:30 PST