User Tag List

Informational! Informational!:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 8 of 10

Thread: A small bone to pick

  1. #1
    N=R* fs fp ne fl fi fc L Pyro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    4,844
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Maybe I am being a pill but it seems that of late every time someone puts up a picture of a plant for ID everyone insists that the plant is "such and such" cultivar. The one I am seeing the most is pretty much every S. x wriglyeana is being identified as 'Scarlete Belle' when they are in fact not This is just the most prevelant example, there are others out there (the S. purpurea post here recently comes first to mind.)

    Now I am sure that everyone probably thinks I am being too sensitive about this but it is important that you not call your plant by a cultivar name unless you are absolutly 200% sure it is that cultivar. Why is it so important? Because a cultivar is a plant that is recognized for a special trait, that is why it was given the distinction of cultivar status. If you just decid to start calling the wrong plant a cultivar then what you are in effect doing is negating the status of the cultivar.

    A prime example of this is the P. 'Sethos'/P. 'Weser' problem we now have, where practically every plant in the U.S. labled P. 'Weser' is actually just a generic P. moranensis x P. ehlersiae hybrid with none of the characteristics of the true P. 'Weser' plant.

    Going back to S. x wriglyeana, I have done some research on this matter and AgriStarts (which is primarily the main source for all mass market CPs) has only been producing typical S. x wriglyeana for market. So all those "Cobra Lily" plants you are finding in Target and the plants from PFT are more than likely just plain jane S. x wriglyeana, which is still a very pretty plant, and should only be labled as such. If you read the cultivar description and look at the picture for 'Scarlete Belle' in the CPN you will see that very few of the S. x wriglyeana pictured here actually match up to the description.

    So I guess the bottom line I am driving at here is: Before you decide to start calling something a cultivar, be sure beyond a shadow of a doubt that you are correct. If there is any indication that the plant is not the cultivar then call it one is negligent and just plain wrong!



    'My love was science- specifically biology and, more specifically, when placed in a common jar, which of two organisms would devour the other.'

    See You Space Cowboy

    actagggcagtgatatcccattggtacatggcaaattagcctcatgat
    Hagerstown, Maryland

    --
    actagggcagtgatatcccattggtacatggcaaattagcctcatgat

  2. #2

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    1,265
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I agree totally. Cultivars are supposed to be "special" and stand out from the crowd. Misidentified cultivars (like S. 'Judy&#39[img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif[/img] will just make them cheap and frustrating when you find you have the wrong one. VFTs are a prime example of this. A nice typical is just that. It is NOT a 'Blood red trap' or some other cultivar that's similar.

    Good point Pyro, I'm with you. I would rather have fewer cultivars that I am sure about than many that I have my doubts about their true identity.

    SF

  3. #3
    Moderator Schmoderator Fluorescent fluorite, England PlantAKiss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia/Zone 7
    Posts
    10,335
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I agree also. I never make assumptions about what I have just because it might LOOK like a photo of some plant. There is a lot more to culivar description than just the general outward appearance. It includes flower appearance, seed characteristics and many other features...a lot of which can't be determined at a glance.

    I still don't understand why more people don't register their cultivars. There are many plants out there being sold to the public but they aren't officially registered. [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif[/img]

    How many VFT cultivars are actually registered cultivars??

    Suzanne
    "Fox terriers are born with about four times as much original sin in them as other dogs." - Jerome K. Jerome

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    1,866
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Good greaf, if I know if it is a culivar or not...I just go by peoples word most of the time. I do know my basics as in vft (common, dente), sundews (capensis, adalae), Nep. (ventricosa), and a Sarr or two if lucky. I am not hear to bs anyone that is for sure (well sometimes in a joking manner). [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rolleyes.gif[/img] Anywho, I do totally agree with youz.

    Travis [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif[/img]
    \"Some cause happiness wherever they go; others, whenever they go.\"
    -- Oscar Wilde

    http://www.nasarracenia.org/

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Oswego, New York, U.S.A.
    Posts
    5,290
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    You are totally right Travis. The protocol for cultivar publication is based on the fact that there are describable differences from other published cultivars, and that there be a photo illustrating these differences.

    It is this difference that defines a cultivar. A popular misconception ,though, is that this difference implies some sort of superiority over other plants of similar nature, and that this is what makes them "special" or "outstanding". This is not true. The plant can actually be quite inferior and the name may still be registered. "Cultivar" per se does not carry any implications of desirability, nor does it grant any "patent" rights. It is the name that is being registered, not the plant itself.

    A current list of legitimate cultivars is maintained by Dr. Jan Schlauer who sits on the International Congress of Botanical Nomenclature which maintains and conserves these descriptions. Dr. Schlauer is co-editor of the ICPN, and the ICPS is the official registering authority for these plants. This list may be viewed may be viewed at:

    http://www.omnisterra.com/foo....rch=all

    I know that you have gone through the registration process, and by now you realize that it is really a simple matter to register a cultivar name. Both Pinguiculaman and I have also registered some cultivar names. The co-editors of the CPN stand ready to assist others wishing to register their plants. I will also be happy to lend my advice to anyone wishing to register a name.

    The hardest part of the process is the wait to see such published!

    I am an advocate of the process, and believe this will finally allow future generations to intelligently discuss the plants they grow. Taxonomy is the wrong tool for most horticulturalists: while useful in understanding field dynamics of populations, it is less useful when dealing with individuals orphaned from those populations. There aren't many growers that persue taxonomy enough to be able to utilize it to determine what they are, or are not, growing.

    The ICBN is also the same institution that has maintained species names for centuries. Odds are that the name you will give your plants will be maintained in the same manner as the names Linneaus gave to plants 400 years ago, and as such will last longer than the names and dates carved on your headstone, or the paper your birth certificate is printed on. This is virtual immortality folks!

    In spite of this amazing fact, right now, there are pitifully few cultivars being resistered (although there are certainly a great number of distinct and various forms being circulated with "bogus" names attached to the scientific binomial!&#33[img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif[/img]. Part of this stems from the misconception that the only plants acceptable for registering are beautiful, prime examples of cultivation efforts. Another is the misconception that one must be a taxonomist to write the descriptions. Both of these ideas are incorrect.

    The actual description needs state only the difference between this cultivar and others of similar type. It need not address every aspect of the plant, or be involved with morphometrics.

    The plants origin (who first produced it) is not needed, although it may be included and is desirable if known. Anyone can register any name that has not previously been registered, even if contrary to "accepted" current popular usage.

    Other points to include in a good description is the manner in which the cultivar form may be reproduced: i.e. by seed or by vegetative reproduction, the reason behind the plants name, and contact information (but all these are optional, not required).

    If there is demonstrated community interest, I would undertake a publication to publish these cultivar names in a dedicated and timely manner. Currently much of the publication is done in the CPN. I have communicated with the co-editors of the CPN, and they are willing to assist with the costs and distribution of such an addendum to the CPN. This would free the CPN space for other content. But I can't do it all on my own: others must get involved for the process to work (not you Barry, you are certainly doing your part: a modern day Linneaus you are :-) )

    So, I heartily encourage everyone to consider registering the plants you are distributing. The distribution factor is they real key, for the wider the distribution, the more people will be asking "What is this plant?": a central reference will provide this answer, and it is the only thing that can. Without it, there is no sense in asking "Is anyone growing a Purple Giant VFT?", since there is no way of knowing for sure what this means. One man's "giant" is another man's "typical". One man's "purple" is another man's "red "! Remember, these plants will spread exponentially over time, and there are certainly enough head scratchers already!

    If you feel the need to add anything to the scientific binomial: descriptive terms like "large" "narrow" "all red" or anything of the sort, I propose to you that you have cultivar material, especially if you are a generous and sharing CP'er as most of you are. New hybrids especially fall into this category, and it is your right (as well as your duty to posterity) to register and record such plants.

    Travis, thanks for the opportunity for me again to get up on the soapbox!
    "Grow More, Share More"

  6. #6

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    1,265
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Tamlin, I'm curious now. Which cultivars did you register? [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif[/img]

    That's quite an accomplishment IMHO.

    SF

  7. #7
    N=R* fs fp ne fl fi fc L Pyro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    4,844
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Tamlin,

    You don't need my encouragment to get on the soapbox [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif[/img] but I am glad I was able to help.

    I too am curious which plants you sent in to be registered. I know you mentioned a few to me that you were thinking of but I don't think I heard the final decision.
    'My love was science- specifically biology and, more specifically, when placed in a common jar, which of two organisms would devour the other.'

    See You Space Cowboy

    actagggcagtgatatcccattggtacatggcaaattagcctcatgat
    Hagerstown, Maryland

    --
    actagggcagtgatatcccattggtacatggcaaattagcctcatgat

  8. #8
    Moderator Schmoderator Fluorescent fluorite, England PlantAKiss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia/Zone 7
    Posts
    10,335
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Is that Cultivar list COMPLETE?? If so, there is little on it. The only flytraps that are registered cultivars are: Clumping Cultivar, Dentate, Dente and Sawtooth.

    So...I guess in a sense this means all other VFT (and non-registered) plants are sort of...bogus in a way...?

    As much as you hear about cultivars...to see that list of registered ones is pretty lean. Why don't people register their plants before they mass produce them and send them out into the public? [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif[/img]
    "Fox terriers are born with about four times as much original sin in them as other dogs." - Jerome K. Jerome

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •