Species, naming selections, final paper.doc
Dear All,
Here is the document that the RHS Daffodil and Tulip Committee and the RHS Advisory Panel on Narcissus Classification (now the Advisory Sub-Committee on Narcissus Classification) produced about naming selections from species.
The International Code of Nomenclature for Cultivated Plants is now in its eighth edition, having been republished last year. In essence, however, the information in the document remains the same.
Best wishes,
Sharon
Sharon McDonald
International Registrar
RHS Garden Wisley
Woking
Surrey
UK
GU23 6QB
tel: (+44) (0)1483 212403
fax: (+44) (0)1483 211750
Hello Brian and Sharon,
I have addressed the issue of naming species with the Advisory Committee on a previous occasion. Your replies assured me that the matter has been taken seriously. I had only been given a seemingly dismissive reply before.. Thankyou both sincerely.
My original point still stands and that relates to the final addendum statement on the RHSs position paper. I strongly support the line that Malcolm took that, although it is named, a selection of the species is still 100% genetically that species. I would much rather see the selection registered as Div 13 N calcicola selection ‘Idol.’ Or maybe it could be placed in Div 12 or Div 14 Named Species Narcissus.
If crossed I would claim that “Idol” x N calcicola is pure calcicola species and not another Div 7 hybrid as the current system would have it. The current system leads to terrible confusion when trying to identify species as distinct from their selected clones.
If we go down the line that once a bulb is grown from seed in a garden then it is a cultivar then few of us actually grow any true species in our collection. I grow most of my N cyclamineus from seed. Based on the logic above I could give each one a number and exhibit them as raised by exhibitor and classified as Div 6. That is not ethical but it is legal.
I appreciate the work that has been done but feel there is a little more to do.
David Adams
Christchurch