Hi Jim, Firstly, my apologies for interfering with your original. As you indicate, I have no idea what the consequences might be so I really should not have done it. David, you sort of touched on the aspect of the capital G Group concept which appeals to me so greatly, and which makes it such a useful tool when sorting out plants without pedigrees: while it's axiomatic that the categories of formal botany not be polyphyletic, the elements which make up a capital G Group may be polyphyletic. Exactly right. As far as I read the rules, the basis of the Group can be as wide or as narrow as the author wishes, so long as he properly describes and publishes it. Its intentionally a practical tool for the use of horticulturalists. Of course, the more useful it is the more it will be used, the more useless it is, the reverse. Has no subset (i.e. capital G Group) of Tubergenii Group been named for the group of cultivars which are candidates for consideration as 'Guinea Gold'? The answer is that I really don't know. In particular, I don't know what the desciption of Tubergenii Group is or where it was published and I don't know if any other Group have been published which would be more helpful and which include 'Guinea Gold'. The person who should know that is the International Cultivar Registrar (I'm that for Geranium and Erodium only) who is based at the Royal General Bulbgrowers Association in the Netherlands (who does a wide range of hardy bulbs). But every once and a while one runs across a plant which has the sort of characteristics which make an exceptional garden plant and seems to answer to one's preconceived notion of what 'Guinea Gold' should be. These have presumably been the source of the "false Guinea Golds" said to be making the rounds. I guess that the reason the Group was created was that there were so many "close relations" floating around without any clear idea of the original cultivar. That probably became problem due to a careless original description of the cultivar that was so wide as to include many of its subsequent off-spring. Best regards, David Victor