Problem with English here.

"Core Eudicots" are the original true dicots so simply calling them dicots
should be sufficient.

The primative trimerous dicots are not true dicots in the modern sense and
they are the group in need of a name of their own. Presently the group still
lacks a name of its own.

If you claim the group has a name, tell us what it is.


P van Rijckevorsel wrote in message
...
Cereoid+10 schreef
Calling the true dicots with 4-5 merous flowers "Core Eudicots" is
redundant and unnecessary.

+ + +
Since it is a distinct clade it deserves a distinct name.
"Core Eudicots" may not be a thing of beauty, but is unambiguous
+ + +

What is needed is a term to describe the primitive 3-merous false
dicots!!

+ + +
All the basal clades do have names.
BTW There is no such thing as "false dicots"
Although it has lost quite a bit of luster as a hypothesis for a natural
grouping, "dicot" is still a name in current usage and none of the plants
belonging to it are false. They all do exist.
PvR