Northern Nut Growers Association Report of the Proceedings at the 44th Annual Meeting: Rochester, N.Y. August 31 and September 1, 1953
Science
Northern Nut Growers Association Report of the Proceedings at the 44th Annual Meeting: Rochester, N.Y. August 31 and September 1, 1953
Northern Nut Growers Association -- Periodicals; Nut trees -- Periodicals; Nuts -- Periodicals
(1) If the parentage is known, a bare _formula_ consisting of the names
of the parents, in alphabetical order, connected with a multiplication
sign, _e.g._ _Lewisia cotyledon_ x _rediviva_.
(2) A name in Latin form (corresponding to a non-hybrid specific
epithet), preceded by a multiplication sign, _e.g._ _Viburnum_ x
_bodnantense_.
(3) A vernacular phrase containing the word "hybrid," "cross," "grex"
(Latin for flock or group), or other similar word, making evident the
collective nature of the phrase, _e.g._ _Lilium_ 'Bellingham Hybrids.'
Why do we have to have these three different forms for the second part
of the full name, and when, to put it briefly, should we use which?
I must admit that practice on this particular point is as yet by no
means fixed, and no doubt it will be modified considerably during the
next few years, as more horticulturists try to apply the Code to the
groups in which they are interested.
In order to understand the alternatives available, it will be helpful, I
think, to consider first the _third part_ of the full name, as the use
of this, and of the second part, are very closely connected. The third
part, as I have said, is a cultivar-name of a particular form of the
hybrid concerned, and, in the first place, it is extremely important to
realize that _every cultivated hybrid that is considered worth naming at
all should receive a cultivar-name from the outset of its "career,"
even_ _if, at the time, only one form is known, or is considered worth
naming._ To take an actual example, at the time when the new hybrid
_Viburnum_ x _bodnantense_ was described in the _Botanical Magazine_,
only one form, or clone, of it had been "put into circulation," and yet
that single clone was given a cultivar-name, 'Dawn.' The object of doing
this was to be able, in the future, to refer by name to this particular
clone and so avoid confusion with any later, and possibly inferior,
forms of the same cross that might be produced. In the absence of the
name 'Dawn,' less desirable clones could legitimately be passed off
under the collective name _V_. x _bodnantense_ without the acquirer
realising that he was not getting the original and superior form.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account