Thank you for your reply. I've interspersed comments among your posting.

"Cereoid+10+" wrote in message
om...
Cultivar groups are not botanical taxa and they don't count.

I know they're not botanical but they may help one identify a plant more
precisely.

Common names mean nothing of value.

They help me, and maybe you, to recognize the plant faster.

Eustoma grandiflora being called Lisianthus (Lisianthus russelliana) is
because of a misidentification by the horticultural trade that
unfortunately
stuck. The flowers of Eustoma look nothing at all like those of
Lisianthus.
In the revision of the genus Lisianthus done many years ago, Eustoma
grandiflora was specifically excluded from the genus.

Too bad the horticultural trade won't change. I see though now that there
is a distinction between acceptable synonymous names and erroneous
horticultural ones.

The only valid conserved family names are those ending in -aceae. The old
Jussieu family names are no longer used except by a few old die-hards and
unenlightened horticulturists.

When I do internet searches, I find more than a few research publications
that use
the old names. For example, last week I looked for diseases of the
Asteraceae,
( my seedlings of this family all suffered from the same disease last year,)
and the only thing I could find was long, detailed, scientific, and referred
to Compositae,
not Asteraceae. As far as I can tell, botanical taxonomists don't prohibit
use of the old names or even really encourage switching.

The genus Coleus is synonymous with Plectranthus. The type species for the
genus Coleus is Plectranthus amboinicus.

?? I don't know what a type species is. Is that a species that is
representative
of the genus and by decision arbitrarily defines the genus?

The "Coleus" of the horticultural
trade is correctly named Solenostemon scutellarioides and is not at all a
member of Plectranthus section Coleus in the proper botanical sense. The
species has many synonyms.

Again, I wish the trade would switch. But why should they when the trade
names seem more enduring than the botanical ones (humour), are better
known, and are a lot easier to say!

I sympathize with your trying to keep up with the Asteraceae. The family
is
in the process of a major overhaul and many formerly large and amorphous
genera are being divided up into smaller more sharply defined genera. Many
old species names are being reduced to synonymy also.

I appreciate your reply and your taking the time to respond, and thank you
again!

Andrew