|
When L.H. Bailey first coined the word
"cultivar" in 1923, he intended it to
distinguish plants that had originated in cultivation (as hybrids or
mutations) from those that had originated in the wild (species).
It was not until 1953, when Bailey lay on his deathbed, that botanists
belatedly "accepted" his term cultivar. Unfortunately, they also
completely changed its definition.
This completely defeats what Bailey tried
to,
and did,
accomplish: To clearly distingush between plants that are species
(collected in the wild) and plants that are hybrids created by man in
cultivation or mutations not existing in the wild. Due to their lack of comprehension,
botanists
provided their own
"rules". A cultivar could either consist of one clone, or it could be a
mixture of plants having as little as one thing in common (flower
color, parentage or anything else they chose to base that particular
cultivar name one). Intentionally or unintentionally, they
created their rules in such a way that it is impossible to know whether
a cultivar consists of one clone (so that all plants bearing a given
name are absolutely identical) or whether it consists of a mixture of
seedlings that may be only vaguely similar. Several years ago, I wrote an article for
American Nurseryman that has
been reprinted in England, Holland, and Germany and has infuriated
botanists worldwide ("A Clone By Any Other Name ... Is Not A Clone,"
Dec 1, 1988). As a result, many knowledgeable garden writers are
now adopting the word clone and using it openly, further infuriating
botanists. I am now proposing a solution to this
dilemma
that will allow botanists
to save face and stil make it possible for people to know if they are
going to get the plants they expect. According to the rules of nomenclature,
the
word cultivar name only
means that a plant is in cultivation. Neither of these things
signifies if a plant is a species that was collected in the wild, a
hybrid that originated in cultivation or mutation. Furthermore,
most gardeners are not interested in this information. They are
only interested in getting the plants they want.
If a plant is a clone, and all the plants
under its name are propagated vegetatively and are absolutely
identical, its name should be preceded by the symbol "Cl" for clone and
enclosed in single quotes (for example, Hosta 'Cl 'Solar Flare' and
Malus 'Cl Coral Cascade'. This system should satisfy gardeners' need
to
know exactly what they
are getting while still complying with the rules of nomenclature, which
botanists are so reluctant to change. |