Re: Describing other people's "cultivars"

From: SCHLAUER@chemie.uni-wuerzburg.de
Date: Tue Mar 10 1998 - 16:21:14 PST


Date:          Tue, 10 Mar 1998 16:21:14 
From: SCHLAUER@chemie.uni-wuerzburg.de
To: cp@opus.hpl.hp.com
Message-Id: <aabcdefg889$foo@default>
Subject:       Re: Describing other people's "cultivars"

Dear Andrew, Barry, et al.,

> >They are neat clones, but not ones I
> >would give names to as I did not make the cross. My own personal beliefs
> >on this are that I would only name a plant that I personally created.
>
> Actually, if a plant has been introduced, and the originator has not shown
> an interest in describing the plant as a cultivar, anyone else may
> describe the plant as a cultivar.

This should perhaps be explained in more detail. Art.22.6. ICNCP
reads: "A new cultivar epithet is not established if its publication
is against the expressed wish of its originator or his assignee,
unless the originator or his assignee had knowingly distributed that
cultivar without a proposed cultivar epithet."

So if a nameless plant (without cultivar name) reaches you by
purchase, trade or any other deliberate way of distribution from the
originator (or his assignee), you are free to do with the plant what
you like. If there was a cultivar name attached to the plant (even if
that name was not established), any publication would at least require
the originator's expressed consent.

Irrespective of the author and originator, the accepted cultivar
epithet is the earliest one which must be adopted for it under the
Rules (Art.10.1.ICNCP).

Kind regards
Jan



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Jan 02 2001 - 17:31:30 PST