Bob Nold wrote: 'The contemporary (insofar as the publication date of the monograph, 2013, can be considered contemporary) concept is the same as DC’s concept. It has not changed. Tulipa clusiana DC is and always has been T. clusiana DC. " Isn't this a good example of confusing nomenclature and science? Yes, the pentaploid form has been Tulipa clusiana since the time of DC. But the combination of names "Tulipa clusiana DC " no longer means simply the pentaploid form: it includes all the varies forms (diploids, triploids, tetraploids, pentaploids). To say that the modern concept is the same as de Candolle's is to overlook the fact that de Candolle's name Tulipa clusiana was coined for a single entity, yet our contemporary usage includes a number of other forms which probably would have astonished de Candolle. And Tulipa stellata (later determined to be a tetraploid form) in fact was known during de Candolle's lifetime. Jim McKenney _______________________________________________ pbs mailing list pbs@lists.ibiblio.org http://pacificbulbsociety.org/list.php http://pacificbulbsociety.org/pbswiki/