Geir Harris Hedemark wrote:

Rob Halgren writes:


'splitter'. Christenson's argument in his Phalaenopsis monograph is
reasonably convincing, especially if you take it in the context of his



Giving a reason that an error has been made at some point is one
thing.

Explaining why this error needs to be fixed is something very
different.

Trying to reuse a name already in use in the fix should be grounds for
immediate suspension by the heels on the local pier, with the head at
the low tide mark. When he survives a week of tides (my local tides,
mind. They are about 15cm) is when I will think reusing old names is a
good thing.



I disagree a bit... Taxonomy is by definition going to fall down on
occassion, nature doesn't come wrapped up in pretty paper with ribbons
around each species, easily distinguishable from each other under the
christmas tree of life... Names should be fixed to reflect current
ideas in biology, if necessary. If that means reverting a 'new name'
back to an 'old name', so be it. That _does not_ mean that everything
needs a new name. The RHS has been pretty good about distinguishing
horticultural and botanical namespaces. For example, Epidendrum x
Cattleya = Epicattleya. Encyclia x Cattleya = Epicattleya. I'd argue
that the division of Encyclia and Epidendrum was a very good thing (they
are very different). But equally good was RHS keeping the horticultural
definition of Epicattleya consistent. They did the same thing when
Brassavola digbyana was (correctly) deemed to be in another genus
(Rhyncholaelia). Bl., Blc, Slc, Pot., etc, are highly dependent on R.
digbyana in the background, but again the RHS hasn't instituted a
wholesale name change.

I guess my point is that the species names should reflect the
current taxonomy, which is easy enough to fix. Intergeneric hybrids,
especially well established ones, shouldn't be mucked with. There is a
great deal of difference between horticultural naming and botanical
naming. No need to change all Dtps. to Phal. It wouldn't work anyway,
there are duplicate names (Phal. Arianne Cohen and Dtps. Arianne Cohen,
for example). That is a tide pool I don't want to jump into....

Rob

--
Rob's Rules: http://www.msu.edu/~halgren
1) There is always room for one more orchid
2) There is always room for two more orchids
2a. See rule 1
3) When one has insufficient credit to purchase
more orchids, obtain more credit