I am working on a checklist of a plant group that contains cultivars. Some of them have been described under the rule of the Botanical Code but are clearly cultivars. Of course, I need to list those names but I wonder it it might be useful to list them distinctly (as cultivars) instead of simply synonymizing them. This is especially in regard to the fact that some of those botanically named cultivars are morphologically distinct (but not biologically relevant, e.g. leaf shape mutations) and are in cultivation.
Dear Norbert,
Kindly See the Preamble of ICN:
11 The International Code of Nomenclature for Cultivated Plants is prepared under the authority of the International Commission for the Nomenclature of Cultivated Plants and deals with the use and formation of names applied to special categories of organisms in agriculture, forestry, and horticulture.
AND the four Notes under Art. 28.1:
• 28.1 Organisms brought from the wild into cultivation retain the names that are applied to them when growing in nature.
o Note 1. Hybrids, including those arising in cultivation, may receive names as provided in App. I (see also Art. 11.9, 32.4, and 50).
o Note 2. Additional, independent designations for special categories of organisms used in agriculture, forestry, and horticulture (and arising either in nature or cultivation) are dealt with in the International Code of Nomenclature for Cultivated Plants (ICNCP), which defines the cultivar as its basic category (see Pre. 11).
o Note 3. Nothing precludes the use, for cultivated organisms, of names published in accordance with the requirements of this Code.
o Note 4. Epithets in names published in conformity with this Code are retained as cultivar epithets, included in single quotation marks, under the rules of the ICNCP when it is considered appropriate to treat the taxon concerned under that Code.
So in my opinion you can definitely keep the names of cultivars if you like.
With best wishes,
Subir.
I will list all names published under the rules of the ICN, that's not the point but rather if it would be like:
1. Genus species_1
Type:...
= Genus species_1 var. cultivar_1
== Genus species_1 f. cultivar_1
Type:...
Note: commonly cultivated as Genus species_1 'Cultivar_1'
= Genus species_1 f. cultivar_2
Type:...
Note: commonly cultivated as Genus species_1 'Cultivar_2'
2. Genus_species_2
or like this:
1a. Genus species_1
Type:...
1b. Genus species_1 'Cultivar_1'
= Genus species_1 var. cultivar_1
== Genus species_1 f. cultivar_1
Type:...
1c. Genus species_1 'Cultivar_2'
= Genus species_1 f. cultivar_2
Type:...
2. Genus_species_2
As an update to my inquiry, the manuscripts in question are already published: Article No taxon left behind? - A critical taxonomic checklist of Ca...
andArticle The nutty world of hazel names – a critical taxonomic checkl...
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Geoscience
- Asia
- India