A couple questions...

1. Are N. lutea and N. nucifera generally considered the same species? I
came across a SEM analysis
(http://www.uta.edu/biology/arnott/po...troduction.htm) which cites
a paper [Borsch, T. & Barthlott, W. 1996. Classification and
Distribution of the genus Nelumbo Adans (Nelumbonaceae)], that
apparently states the only significant difference between N. lutea and
N. nucifera is flower color, and that they are now classified as
subspecies. Has anyone read this paper? Is the proper nomenclature N.
nucifera nucifera and N. nucifera lutea? Speaking of names, I've seen
other "species" of Nelumbo mentioned on the net...N. alba grandiflora,
N. nucifera caspicum, N. nucifera rosea, N. pentapetala and N.
pekinensis rubra. Are all of these just cultivars and/or obsolete nomenclature?

2. The newest phylogenetic tree I have is Soltis et al 1999 (the one
published in Nature). Is everything pretty much the same now, or has
alot of stuff been moved around since then? Can anyone point me to
something more current/accurate (if necessary)?

Quegmo Backwater


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----

I would not know.
A couple points:
1) according to Mabberley (1997) it is just the one species (with former
species "sometimes treated as subspecies"). In how far this is "generally
accepted": your guess is as good as mine

2) There is no way for proper nomenclature to be "N. nucifera nucifera and
N. nucifera lutea" since when referring to ranks below the level of species
it is a requirement to indicate rank. A proper name might be Nelumbo lutea
ssp nucifera

3) The placement by cpDNA of Nelumbo near Platanus and Proteaceae is one of
the high points of APG. If this would have changed this would have been big
news. So, unlikely

4) There are, seemingly interminable, lists of references at the APG-site
PvR

==============
Quegmo Backwater schreef
A couple questions...

1. Are N. lutea and N. nucifera generally considered the same species? I
came across a SEM analysis
(http://www.uta.edu/biology/arnott/po...troduction.htm) which cites
a paper [Borsch, T. & Barthlott, W. 1996. Classification and
Distribution of the genus Nelumbo Adans (Nelumbonaceae)], that
apparently states the only significant difference between N. lutea and
N. nucifera is flower color, and that they are now classified as
subspecies. Has anyone read this paper? Is the proper nomenclature N.
nucifera nucifera and N. nucifera lutea? Speaking of names, I've seen
other "species" of Nelumbo mentioned on the net...N. alba grandiflora,
N. nucifera caspicum, N. nucifera rosea, N. pentapetala and N.
pekinensis rubra. Are all of these just cultivars and/or obsolete
nomenclature?

2. The newest phylogenetic tree I have is Soltis et al 1999 (the one
published in Nature). Is everything pretty much the same now, or has
alot of stuff been moved around since then? Can anyone point me to
something more current/accurate (if necessary)?

Quegmo Backwater


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----

It seems like this may depend on whether you are a lumper or a
splitter. The USDA Plants Database and Flora of North America
recognize two species.

Nelumbo nucifera:
http://hua.huh.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/F...ID=20000707 9

Nelumbo lutea:
http://hua.huh.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/F...ID=23350079 6

There seem to be several other morphological differences besides
flower color. Hortus Third notes that N. nucifera can be
differentiated from N. lutea because N. nucifera
1. is larger,
2. often has sinuate, rather than entire, leaf margins,
3. has glaucous leaves,
4. has rough petioles and peduncles,
5. has very fragrant flowers.

If you go with one species then based on the webpage you cited, it is
apparently Nelumbo nucifera, and the yellow type is Nelumbo nucifera
ssp. lutea. The nonyellow types would be designated Nelumbo nucifera
ssp. nucifera.

According to the Flora of North America page on N. lutea, Nelumbo
pentapetala is proposed for rejection. Other Nelumbo synonyms are
found he http://www.ars-grin.gov/cgi-bin/npgs...splist.pl?8035

The other names you listed seem to represent cultivar names but they
are not in proper form. Before rules for cultivars were established, a
lot of cultivars were named as botanical varieties or forms. A lot of
the old Latin variety or forma names were grandfathered in as cultivar
names. If the name was in use before the International Code of
Nomenclature for Cultivated Plants took effect, you could properly
write Nelumbo 'Alba Grandiflora' and Nelumbo 'Pekinensis Rubra'. I
didn't see Nelumbo 'Caspicum' on the following unofficial list of
Nelumbo cultivars, but it seems to be in the trade.
http://www.victoria-adventure.org/lo..._names_a-e.htm

To be certain on cultivar names you need to check the official
registrar for Nelumbo cultivars which seems to be Ganna Walska
Lotusland but they don't seem to have an official cultivar list
online.

http://www.lotusland.org/introreg.htm


David R. Hershey





Quegmo Backwater wrote in message ...
A couple questions...

1. Are N. lutea and N. nucifera generally considered the same species? I
came across a SEM analysis
(http://www.uta.edu/biology/arnott/po...troduction.htm) which cites
a paper [Borsch, T. & Barthlott, W. 1996. Classification and
Distribution of the genus Nelumbo Adans (Nelumbonaceae)], that
apparently states the only significant difference between N. lutea and
N. nucifera is flower color, and that they are now classified as
subspecies. Has anyone read this paper? Is the proper nomenclature N.
nucifera nucifera and N. nucifera lutea? Speaking of names, I've seen
other "species" of Nelumbo mentioned on the net...N. alba grandiflora,
N. nucifera caspicum, N. nucifera rosea, N. pentapetala and N.
pekinensis rubra. Are all of these just cultivars and/or obsolete nomenclature?

2. The newest phylogenetic tree I have is Soltis et al 1999 (the one
published in Nature). Is everything pretty much the same now, or has
alot of stuff been moved around since then? Can anyone point me to
something more current/accurate (if necessary)?

Quegmo Backwater

+ + +
A few more points:
+ + +

David Hershey schreef:
It seems like this may depend on whether you are a lumper or a
splitter. The USDA Plants Database and Flora of North America
recognize two species.

+ + +
I did not do justice to Mabberley, who also assumes two species, sometimes
treated as subspecies. If treated as subspecies the yellow one would indeed
be Nelumbo nucifera ssp lutea
+ + +

Nelumbo nucifera:
http://hua.huh.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/F...RA_ID=12395&TA
XON_ID=200007079

Nelumbo lutea:
http://hua.huh.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/F...RA_ID=12395&TA
XON_ID=233500796

There seem to be several other morphological differences besides
flower color. Hortus Third notes that N. nucifera can be
differentiated from N. lutea because N. nucifera
1. is larger,
2. often has sinuate, rather than entire, leaf margins,
3. has glaucous leaves,
4. has rough petioles and peduncles,
5. has very fragrant flowers.

If you go with one species then based on the webpage you cited, it is
apparently Nelumbo nucifera, and the yellow type is Nelumbo nucifera
ssp. lutea. The nonyellow types would be designated Nelumbo nucifera
ssp. nucifera.

According to the Flora of North America page on N. lutea, Nelumbo
pentapetala is proposed for rejection.

+ + +
Technically this is not quite accurate.
What was proposed for rejection is Nymphaea pentapetala
This proposal passed, which makes this a rejected name in the full sense of
the word. The combination Nelumbo pentapetala is not to be used (56.1).
+ + +

Other Nelumbo synonyms are
found he http://www.ars-grin.gov/cgi-bin/npgs...splist.pl?8035

+ + +
These include Nelumbo caspicum
+ + +

The other names you listed seem to represent cultivar names but they
are not in proper form. Before rules for cultivars were established, a
lot of cultivars were named as botanical varieties or forms. A lot of
the old Latin variety or forma names were grandfathered in as cultivar
names. If the name was in use before the International Code of
Nomenclature for Cultivated Plants took effect, you could properly
write Nelumbo 'Alba Grandiflora' and Nelumbo 'Pekinensis Rubra'. I
didn't see Nelumbo 'Caspicum' on the following unofficial list of
Nelumbo cultivars, but it seems to be in the trade.
http://www.victoria-adventure.org/lo..._names_a-e.htm

+ + +
Looks like a good example of the rule of ignoring typo's:
"misspellings are not included"
+ + +

To be certain on cultivar names you need to check the official
registrar for Nelumbo cultivars which seems to be Ganna Walska
Lotusland but they don't seem to have an official cultivar list
online.

http://www.lotusland.org/introreg.htm

David R. Hershey

==============
Quegmo Backwater wrote in message
...
A couple questions...

1. Are N. lutea and N. nucifera generally considered the same species? I
came across a SEM analysis
(http://www.uta.edu/biology/arnott/po...troduction.htm) which cites
a paper [Borsch, T. & Barthlott, W. 1996. Classification and
Distribution of the genus Nelumbo Adans (Nelumbonaceae)], that
apparently states the only significant difference between N. lutea and
N. nucifera is flower color, and that they are now classified as
subspecies. Has anyone read this paper? Is the proper nomenclature N.
nucifera nucifera and N. nucifera lutea? Speaking of names, I've seen
other "species" of Nelumbo mentioned on the net...N. alba grandiflora,
N. nucifera caspicum, N. nucifera rosea, N. pentapetala and N.
pekinensis rubra. Are all of these just cultivars and/or obsolete
nomenclature?

2. The newest phylogenetic tree I have is Soltis et al 1999 (the one
published in Nature). Is everything pretty much the same now, or has
alot of stuff been moved around since then? Can anyone point me to
something more current/accurate (if necessary)?

Quegmo Backwater

Actually, the synonym on the webpage I cited is Nelumbo capsica. The
question was about N. nucifera caspicum. However, one webpage uses
Nelumbo caspicum which seems to be an error.
http://www.hortpix.com/pc2848.htm

It is unclear whether it is N. nucifera var. caspicum or N. nucifera
'Caspicum'. It could be both if there is a large population of
red-flowered plants in the Caspian Sea that are considered a botanical
variety.

This webpage uses N. nucifera var. caspica:
http://www.wetlands.org/RDB/Ramsar_D...p/IR005D02.pdf

This webpage uses N. nucifera var. Caspicum:
http://www.tcfb.com/perwatg/lotus.html

This webpage lists "Nelumbo nucifera capsicum" so is that a typo or a
different cultivar?
http://www.botany.com/nelumbo.html

There is also a Nelumbo 'Caspium' listed, which may be a typo or a
different cultivar.
http://pss.uvm.edu/pss123/aqnelum.html


Plant cultivar names are regulated by international agreement. Plant
common names are not. Therefore, your "rule of ignoring typo's [sic]"
applies to cultivar names but not common names. Typos in plant common
names are often retained as new common names such as bodark, bodare
us, bodeck and bodock, all misspellings of bois d'arc (Maclura
pomifera).

David R. Hershey



"P van Rijckevorsel" wrote in message ...

Other Nelumbo synonyms are
found he http://www.ars-grin.gov/cgi-bin/npgs...splist.pl?8035

+ + +
These include Nelumbo caspicum
+ + +

The other names you listed seem to represent cultivar names but they
are not in proper form. Before rules for cultivars were established, a
lot of cultivars were named as botanical varieties or forms. A lot of
the old Latin variety or forma names were grandfathered in as cultivar
names. If the name was in use before the International Code of
Nomenclature for Cultivated Plants took effect, you could properly
write Nelumbo 'Alba Grandiflora' and Nelumbo 'Pekinensis Rubra'. I
didn't see Nelumbo 'Caspicum' on the following unofficial list of
Nelumbo cultivars, but it seems to be in the trade.
http://www.victoria-adventure.org/lo..._names_a-e.htm

+ + +
Looks like a good example of the rule of ignoring typo's:
"misspellings are not included"
+ + +

David Hershey schreef
Actually, the synonym on the webpage I cited is Nelumbo capsica. The
question was about N. nucifera caspicum.

+ + +

Yes, since Nelumbo nucifera caspicum is not an accepted form of reference
for any name it can be taken to mean anything.
PvR

David Hershey schreef
Actually, the synonym on the webpage I cited is Nelumbo capsica. The
question was about N. nucifera caspicum.


P van Rijckevorsel schreef
Yes, since Nelumbo nucifera caspicum is not an accepted form of reference
for any name it can be taken to mean anything.
PvR

+ + +

Actually there is a little more to it than that ...

If the species Nelumbo caspica ever is treated as a cultivar it will
automatically be Nelumbo nucifera 'Caspica' (ICNCP 17.3)

If any infraspecific combination based on Nelumbo caspica is made (don't
seem to be ?) then it is recommended to retain the epithet "caspica"

PvR