Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Floral anatomy question
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 |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
floral tools,floral garden tools,floral hand tools supplier in china | Australia | |||
Floral anatomy question OT | Plant Science | |||
Floral anatomy & Religion | Plant Science | |||
Floral anatomy question OT! Rinkytink | Plant Science | |||
Floral anatomy question - OT thanks to Beverly | Plant Science |