Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 08:09:30 -0700 From: ricell@juno.com To: cp@opus.hpl.hp.com Message-Id: <aabcdefg718$foo@default> Subject: Re: On Cultivars
Peter D'Amato writes:
>So far, ICPS only registers CULTIVARS, and not simply new crosses, as
does
>more organized and established hobbies as orchids. When a new hybrid is
>produced, if it is the first time such a cross was made, then it should
be
>published and registered with a fancy non-Latin name. Thereafter,
anyone
>duplicating the cross would always call it by that name.
This brings up a question I have wondered for some time and not
being very familiar with this topic I thought I would pose here. I
can see giving names to first generation hybrids. However, once
one starts to cross plants that are themselves hybrids, there
should in theory be significant variation in the offspring. I wonder
how useful the name will be in the face of this variation. Is this
one of those cases where there is a lot of "theoretical variation"
but in practice all (for example) (S. x mitchelliana) x (S. x formosa)
crosses look pretty much the same?
On a related note. Are many of the morphologic characters of
Nepenthes sex linked? If they are, then it seems that having
different names for essentially the same cross (only by opposite
sexed parents) makes sense. If not, it seems to me to only add
a layer of unnecessary confusion.
Anyone know how the orchid growers handle these situations?
Rich
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Jan 02 2001 - 17:31:29 PST