Rachel Saunders
Thu, 15 Dec 2005 03:36:28 PST
John Manning who did the research to change the names, and published the
name changes, will agree with you 100%. I once complained to him about the
Galaxias being lumped into Moraeas, and he said "well, continue to call them
Galaxias, you don't have to change them!" so I do.   Names are only man's
way of trying to put things into boxes, and as long as everyone knows what
you are talking about, call them by their old names. So if you think of them
as Albucas, call them that, and continue to do so. All that the botanists do
by lumping them is acknowledge that they are very closely related to
Ornithogalum, and should be in the same "box".
Rachel Saunders
Tel +27 21 762 4245
Fax +27 21 797 6609
PO Box 53108, Kenilworth, 7745 South Africa

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Rodger Whitlock" <>
To: <>
Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2005 1:48 AM
Subject: Re: [pbs] Albuca

> On 14 Dec 05 at 9:51, Rachel Saunders wrote:
> > All Albucas are now Ornithogalums - it has been published.
> A reminder that such a name change is NOT legislation and you are NOT
required to
> follow it. The names have been validly published in Albuca and those
> remain valid.
> Publication of a botanical name or re-name isn't like Moses coming down
from Mt. Sinai
> with the tablets of the law.
> The proof of the pudding is whether the botanical community, in its
infinite wisdom,
> ultimately adopts the proposed generic reassignment, but even then the
older names in
> Albuca are still valid.
> -- 
> Rodger Whitlock
> Victoria, British Columbia, Canada
> Maritime Zone 8, a cool Mediterranean climate
> on beautiful Vancouver Island
> _______________________________________________
> pbs mailing list

More information about the pbs mailing list