Groups etc
John Grimshaw (Sun, 08 Apr 2007 22:53:36 PDT)
I think that Dylan's question (see below) about taxa 'lost' in a botanical
revision is an important one. After Brian Mathew's revision of Iris came out
and he lumped a lot of horticultural 'species' (probably ancient selections)
into Iris germanica, the powers that be at Oxford Botanic Garden, where
there was a good range of these old plants, went out and changed all their
labels at one stroke to Iris germanica. All the history attached to the
former name was lost instantaneously and no doubt in future curatorial
decisions the need to maintain so many accessions of the same species was
questioned, and some discarded. In such cases there is a very good case for
using either a cultivar name, if it is a recognisable clone, or group name.
A current example that is interesting me is a Tilia - not bulbous, sorry,
but I have broad interests. In 1919 Ernest Wilson collected a lime from
Ullung-Do (Takesima Island) between Japan and Korea. It was named Tilia
insularis but it is only minimally different from the mainland T. amurensis
and is now considered to be a form of that species and placed in synonymy as
such. Wilson undoubtedly collected elite material of it, and sent it to the
Arnold Arboretum, who passed on a tree to Kew. This has become a most
beautiful specimen, with large inflorescences of wonderfully scented
flowers. In consequence it has been much propagated-from and I'm sure that
all trees in European cultivation labelled Tilia insularis are in fact this
clone. To my mind it should be given a cultivar name under T. amurensis to
enable this exceptional entity to be properly recognised.
This case also illustrates a favourite theme of mine, that gardeners
frequently get an image of a species based on a very limited sample of
specimens or indeed an illustration, and then are quite surprised when a
botanist (who has studied a wide range of material) says that an apparently
dissimilar plant is also the same species.
John Grimshaw
Dr John M. Grimshaw
Sycamore Cottage
Colesbourne
Nr Cheltenham
Gloucestershire GL53 9NP
Tel. 01242 870567
COLESBOURNE PARK OPEN DAYS 2007
Easter Monday 9 April, Arboretum Weekend 15-16 September
Gates open 1pm, last entry 4 pm
website: http://www.colesbournegardens.org.uk/
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dylan Hannon" <othonna@gmail.com>
To: "Pacific Bulb Society" <pbs@lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Sunday, April 08, 2007 11:30 PM
Subject: Re: [pbs] Arum
John,
Thank you for that concise clarification. On a related note, I have
long wondered if there is any provision (from botanical or
horticultural codes) for validly published names that are synonymized
in the scientific literature yet represent 'taxa' that retain
recognizable characteristics useful in horticulture. Some nurserymen
will use these names parentheically, after the accepted "mother name",
but is there a better way?
The basis for such distinctiveness (in the eyes of some) can be
natural- clones that stand out as different, or sampling from slightly
distinct wild populations- or from goings on in the garden. Whatever
the case they were conceived under nomenclatural rules and have proper
published descriptions, type(s), etc. These taxa, if they are that,
end up in a sort of no-man's land but of course they may be
resurrected later in the scientific literature after further study.