On the naming of plants?

Randall P. Linke randysgarden@gmail.com
Thu, 08 Dec 2011 13:17:38 PST
I think there is a lot of good coming from the genetic work being done, but
afraid some taxonomists use it in place of good morphological studies or to
support theories of convenience to put their names behind a plant's.

One of the latter I have yet to hear coherently explained is that a new
genus can only arise from the genus level, not from a species.  All the
explanations of this I have heard rely on a clear differentiation of a
monotypic genus.  However, if anyone had been around to apply a name, which
is strictly for human convenience, to the first branches I suspect they
would be calling them different species of the same genus, which looks like
a big hole in that theory.  To believe a species can not branch and one
differentiate sufficiently to meet the criteria to be classified as a
distinct but related genus seems more convenient for publishing a new name
than anything else.

If anyone has a coherent explanation of this I would really love to hear
it, privately is fine.

On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 10:45 AM, Mark BROWN <brown.mark@wanadoo.fr> wrote:

> Thank goodness that one is sorted out!

* *
A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong gives it a superficial
appearance of being right. - Thomas Paine  ---

More information about the pbs mailing list