For the edumicated crew:
Why are the old doubles, basically the wild sports that got tamed such as all the ‘Plenus’ es and ‘Telamonius Plenus’, not considered “species” -?
If a flower spontaneously mutates into something else/another flower form, and had no human intervention in the process, and the flower/plant is durable enough to last/reproduce, what is the botanical reasoning behind NOT allowing it to be a species -?
Or is it that these guys cannot reproduce without human intervention … ->?
-s
Certainly the debate over speciation vs regional variation within wild populations continues among many wild organisms – fish, birds, ferns, etc. A species must be a viable wild and naturally reproducing population that is distinct from other similar organisims. Most (not all) species are unable to reproduce with other similar species, and produce viable offspring. Those “sport flowers are not populations that could naturally reproduce and sustain themselves. Additionally, they are not likely “different enough” to be considered a separate species.
Remember Mom this Mother’s Day! Find a florist near you now.
Hello Marilynn
I understand your definition
from the point of view of
species theory, but from the
point of view of daffodil naming
I see the convention that a
named clone becomes a cultivar
even if it is merely a selection
from the species- I believe “Chiva”
is described as a N rupicola
selection and should be shown
as a named cultivar
John Beck
Remember Mom this Mother’s Day! Find a florist near you now.
Dear Sara and All,
Of my fiendishness, I shall mention that Rosa roxburghii was first described in its double form. Later its forma normalis was described.
Whether a plant is a named and recognized entity depends on whether a botanist wants it to be. My opinion, which a given botanist may or may not concur with, is that a form consists of individuals who share a characteristic, or set of them. A variety consists of populations who not only look similar in some respect, but are more closely related to each other than to other members of the species. If a species, such as Narcissus poeticus, has a form flore pleno, all the doubles who arose from not especially closely related parents can be included in it, unless the form is described so as to include some and exclude others.
Best,
Don
Asexual reproduction is also reproduction. If you exclude all species that reproduce asexually ( including some animals!), a large number of species would disappear. To avoid the problem of sterility of double flowers, lets take a different mutant, say a white flowering N cyclamineus (found in the wild). It could be named N cyclamineus forma alba . It could also be given a cultivar name N cyclamineus ‘White Oporto’.
I think it a loss of info if only the cultivar name is used as in N. ‘White Oporto’ So please keep the species name if you are sure it is a species . “A selection” is dangerous description, it could be a sport of the true species but also any kind of hybrid obtained from seed. Only a sport or the offspring of controlled fertilization of a species should include the species name.
Ben Zionneveld
So I wonder if it can be “selfed” it does well in the spring and then dies out for me- might try pulling the bulbs this summer.
John
I don’t want to get into selecting species, but I do want to point out that N. x intermedius is a wild hybrid, supposedly from a cross between a tazetta and a jonquilla. Because it is a hybrid, there can be quite a bit of variability within N. x intermedius itself. The form I grow is rather starry, with a pale orange cup. (photo attached). ‘Baby Boomer’ is not a selection, but is said to come from ‘Avalanche’ x N. jonquilla. I don’t find it surprising that some forms of N. x intermedius might look like ‘Baby Boomer’, since ‘Avalanche’ is a tazetta hybrid, making the parentage in both cases similar. Cousins, perhaps?
Mary Lou
—
Perhaps, first cousins thrice removed! – Rod
John, it cannot be selfed to remain ‘Chiva’. It must be reproduced asexually. N. rupicola is not known to be a good candidate for cloning. It likes to reproduce by seed. I have no idea why it was given a cultivar name.When I saw it at the National Show in Chicago I thought it was a nicely formed N. rupicola but not anything unusual.
Marilynn