No subject

[Arisaema Enthusiast Group (AEG) Discussion List (and other=]

hardy  Aroids)" <ARISAEMA-L at NIC.SURFNET.NL> Aroids)" <ARISAEMA-L at NIC.SURFNET.NL>
Sender: "Arisaema Enthusiast Group (AEG) Discussion List (and other=
From: Wilbert Hetterscheid <hetter at WORLDONLINE.NL>
Subject: Aroid hybrids, registration and the Codes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transf er-Encoding: 7bit

Peoples,

There have been a number of messages the last days about hybrids and
registration (especially helpful is the one by Jim Shields with useful
URL's).

The IAS is International Cultivar Registration Authority (ICRA) for Arace=ae
cultivars (goto www.ishs.org and click on the link to the ICRA-website an=d
find out all there is to know about ICRA's and the codes etc., as also pe=r
Jim Shield's message). I should know, because I am a member of the
international commission governing this ICRA-system. This registration
matter was discussed in the St. Louis Aroid Conference and finally Donna
Atwood took up the responsability of being the registrar. She and I have =had
many email exchanges about the ins and outs of this. Especially important
for a registrar is awareness of all implications of the rules of the
International Code for Nomenclature of Cultivated Plants (ICNCP, 1995), o=f
which I am one of the co-authors. Donna has taken a big responsability on
her shoulders and a lot of work. Very brave!!

Being an ICRA means that a register has to be built in time containg all
legitimate cultivar names. The prime tool in deciding whether a name of a
cultivar is correct is ICNCP and not the botanical code. Cultivars have t=o
have names, and whether they are of hybrid origin or not, is beside the
point and therefore the botanical code is superfluous at this level. Ther=e
is a mechnism in the Botanical Code for naming hybrids in a Linnean way a=nd
unfortunately this has been used mostly for hybrids produced in cultivati=on
(which, when treated sensibly, would have had to be named at the cultivar
level or not at all) and has brought instability in the nomenclature of
cultivated plants in general, as the rules for hybrid names under the
Botanical Code are complex (Latin diagnosis, typification, name changes a=s a
result of intricate rules and overzealous taxonomists etc.). The communit=y
of cultivated plant taxomists is beginning to see that the hybrid appendi=x
of the botanical code is totally unneccesary as a tool in the nomenclatur=e
for cultivated plants. Although academicians may have a lot of time worki=ng
with a system of nomenclature that is inherently unstable (look at all th=e
proposals for rule changes everytime a new code is being discussed in the
botanical community), the users of cultivars (consumers, growers, breeder=s,
lawyers, companies) could do well with a system that has practicality and
saves time using it and does keep instability to a minimum.

The ICNCP has general rules for naming cultivars and they are pretty simp=le
and straightforward. In August this year, the ICNCP will be debated at a
conference for Cultivated Plant Taxonomy in Toronto. At this moment my
friend and prime author of ICNCP, Piers Trehane is visiting me and he tol=d
me he is going to put up a draft of the new ICNCP on the web for
international comments. I will present the URL to this forum when it's
finished (shortly after Easter).

Those were a few tidbits on hybrid names, cultivars names, registration e=tc.
Of course, for those interested there's lots more to learn.

Cheerio,
Wilbert