Jim, I wish I could proof read as easily as I can produce typos. 7 is not even adjacent to 4 on the key board. I do manage to eliminate most of the curious and random letters that appear in words that I have typed.
N.Eysettensis with a capital E and with a 'y' is the current accepted designation in the Plant Finder. As it designates C.sativus with a lower-case 's', I assume that it is deemed to be a species and can be seed raised, but I have no knowledge of that.. There are a number of species that survive only in cultivation. I think the RHS botanists were behind the change in the International Code for cultivated plants which fanatically tightened up on the designation of cultivars, some years ago, by restricting cultivar names to vegetatively propagated plant. Aquilegia 'Nora Barlow' became the Nora Barlow group. A naturally occurring form of Phormium tenax with variable purple (brown) coloured foliage, previously named 'Atropurpureum' in cultivation became the Purpureum group. I'm pleased to say such silliness seems to have been abandoned as the current Plant Finder has reverted to the long established designation of cultivar names, for those that can be seed raised. I doubt many gardeners were prepared to stick 'group' on the name tag of a single plant in the garden. The tacking on 'form' or 'variety' after the original person's name who grew a particular distinct clone of a species, was also eliminated so for example Nerine bowdenii 'Fenwick's variety' became N bowdenii 'Mark Fenwick'. There were a number of other changes as well, but that is enough of a diversion for late at night. Gary Dunlop --- On Wed, 12/1/11, Jim McKenney <[email protected]> wrote: I LOVE what I can learn on this list as long as we are allowed to wander a bit. Thanks, Gary . I don’t have any trouble believing that Narcissus ‘Estettensis’ is four hundred year old, but seven hundred? For a clone which easily beats it in age, try Crocus sativus. Although botanists to this day carry (it’s the type species for the genus, so some messiness would result if changes were to be made) it as a species, it is unknown in the wild and does not match exactly any known sexually reproducing population of wild crocus. It’s traditionally assumed to be derived some way from the crocus sometimes called Crocus cartwrightianus, but I think Crocus moabiticus is also a good candidate. Crocus sativus is said to be triploid. If Crocus sativus is truly clonal, it’s at least two and maybe three THOUSAND years old. Some grape cultivars seem to just as old.
_______________________________________________ Alpine-l mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/alpine-l
