Lupala Victoria, BC(Zone 8b) Mar 24, 2011
Why there are so many white in your area may be as simple as the only local source might have been a white version. So many plants of the same type often originate from only one or two sources in the beginning. Maybe the grower preferred the white? Or only had a white one?
Post #8448679
Quote
faeden SF Bay Area, CA(Zone 9b) Mar 25, 2011
I think you could well be on to something. The simple answer many times is the right one. Thanks for being so wise!
Post #8448687
Quote
Kiyzersoze Coral Springs, FL(Zone 10b) Mar 27, 2011
themoonhowl - When you search PSEUDOBOMBAX ELLIPTICUM Shaving Brush Tree on "Davesgarden" the white is the only one that comes up. It does have 2 picts. of the pink flower mixed it the picts. but it seems to me that there should be 2 different files on the tree. As you mentioned... PSEUDOBOMBAX ELLIPTICUM for the pink and alba for the white. But which came first?
faeden - I can agree with that, but what is the solution? Shouldn't there be 2 different names for the pink and the white?
Palmbob - Maybe you have a point. I had been looking for the pink flower for quite sometime locally but only found the white. So I think the white is easier to find for sale, (eventhough here in South Florida I have never actually seen a white one growing anywhere) but the pink is more exciting for pictures.
Lupala - Great point! Availability does play a big part in why we see some things planted in certain areas and not in others. But, faeden, that is not the answer to this thread, why is there not 2 names for this tree and which came first?
Interesting... When I started this thread I had no idea that it would get us all wondering. Come on... We are Davegarden members!!! We need answers!!! LOL!
Post #8453435
Quote
Kiyzersoze Coral Springs, FL(Zone 10b) Mar 27, 2011
PS
I am going to find a way to root, propagate, something, the pink form and if any of my California neighbors want one they will have it. I have heard that it can be done from the cuttings in about 2 months and rumor has it that a friend of mine put a flower in a glass and it started to form roots. We shall see!
Post #8453446
Quote
faeden SF Bay Area, CA(Zone 9b) Mar 27, 2011
Kiyzersoze, as I stated in one of my posts above, "There are lots of plants which have one species name and more than one flower color. This is one of them." Botanically speaking, It is not necessary nor is it usually the norm to have one species name for one flower color and another species name for another flower color. The flower colors are stated in the official description, as is the case with P. ellipticum var. ellipticum (see Google Books link above)
Post #8453497
Quote
Kiyzersoze Coral Springs, FL(Zone 10b) Mar 27, 2011
Got ya! Thanks for explaining in "Gardening for Dummies" language. LOL! I think us less scientific gardeners are used to seeing every plant (ex. Roses/Hibiscus/etc.) that has a different flower color having a different name. Scientifically speaking it may be wrong but they do it all of the time. Unless I am confused on that too? Any idea which came first? White or Pink? Are they both natural of is one man made?
Post #8453522
Quote
themoonhowl Prairieville, LA(Zone 9a) Mar 27, 2011
Kiyzersoze....I have no idea which came first... but I gather that the proper way to identify them for sale would simply be Pseudobombax ellipticum, white flower or P ellipticum pink flower....guess that is why the taxonomists get the big bux....Grin
Post #8453537
Quote
themoonhowl Prairieville, LA(Zone 9a) Mar 27, 2011
Also, if one were man made, I think it would carry a cultivar name like alba....oops, that takes us back to the beginning...grin
Post #8453543
Kiyzersoze Coral Springs, FL(Zone 10b) Mar 27, 2011
LOL! themoonhowl... Don't go upsetting faeden again! I am sure that faeden is scientifically correct but if we stuck to that would we then only have 1 file for all hibiscus, 1 file for all roses, etc? That would be confusing and hard to get the specific plant/flower you want, therefore we have to have a distinction for each flower color and if the scientists aren't going to do it the growers have too.
Post #8453565
Quote
faeden SF Bay Area, CA(Zone 9b) Mar 27, 2011
You're on the right track, Kiyzersoze and moonhowl. There are two situations in which a plant is given a name based on some small difference, like flower color. The first, and the one which really gets my goat, is that a nursery does it purely for marketing purposes. These names have absolutely no standing in the plant world, but now that we have the Internet they're repeated ad nauseum.
The second instance is that the plant is a cultivar rather than a species. That means that two or more plants were purposely crossed to make a third plant. Since that plant is no longer a single species it gets a cultivar name. That name must follow certain criteria, which are laid out in the International Code of Nomenclature for Cultivated Plants. Unfortunately that book is not available for viewing on the Internet. However, you can read an explanation of how it works on the International Nomenclature Registration Authorities page (http://www.ishs.org/sci/icra.htm). At the bottom of that page are several links, including a couple re how to find correct cultivar names for various genera.
I know this is probably more than you ever wanted to know. Sorry if it's too long!
Post #8453590
Quote
Kiyzersoze Coral Springs, FL(Zone 10b) Mar 27, 2011
No I think it's great! I think orchid names generally follow the guidelines you are refering too, right?
Post #8453610
Quote
faeden SF Bay Area, CA(Zone 9b) Mar 27, 2011
Yes, I think they do. However, I couldn't find a specific place on the Internet where one posted the cultivar names. Doesn't surprise me since there are at least 25,000 of them!
Post #8453626
Quote
themoonhowl Prairieville, LA(Zone 9a) Mar 27, 2011
For things like roses and hibiscus you have Genus and species names followed by cultivar names.
GENUS: Pseudobombax
SPECIES: ellipticum
Genus: Hibiscus
Species: syriacus
Post #8453679
Quote
themoonhowl Prairieville, LA(Zone 9a) Mar 27, 2011
Here is an example of how orchids are named.
http://www.orchidaceae.org/
Genus: Miltonia
Species: spectabilis
variety: moreliana
Post #8453690
Quote
faeden SF Bay Area, CA(Zone 9b) Mar 27, 2011
Moon, I like your Orchid site, but it isn't one which shows how cultivars are named. Unless I missed something?
Also, while in some cases a plant has a genus and species name followed by the cultivar name, that's not always true. Sometimes it's just the genus followed by the cultivar name. I think this is particularly true of roses.
Post #8453716
Quote
themoonhowl Prairieville, LA(Zone 9a) Mar 27, 2011
Post #8453738
Quote
faeden SF Bay Area, CA(Zone 9b) Mar 27, 2011
Yep, a LOT more helpful. LOL! Thank goodness the rest of the plant world with which I'm familiar isn't as confusing! Those orchid enthusiasts can get crazy with their crosses. I'd forgotten, for example that they also combine genera names when they do cross-genera hybrids. They aren't as plentiful in the plant areas with which I'm most familiar - cacti, succulents, caudiciforms, odd bulbs.
Post #8454157
Quote
themoonhowl Prairieville, LA(Zone 9a) Mar 27, 2011
Yup. You can have Brasso Brassiolaelia cattleya X Laelia cv freddie's claw (not really) but I do have a few that have better lineage records than i do...Grin
Post #8454164
Quote
Kiyzersoze Coral Springs, FL(Zone 10b) Mar 27, 2011
Maybe that is why I'm confused, or at least one of the reasons. I was in to orchids way before tropical garden type plants. I had over 400 orchids and lost them in hurricane Wilma. Yes, I brought them inside (all 400+ of them) but we lost our screen inclosure and all of our trees and had no power for 2 weeks. I finally bought an orchid for the first time about a year ago and put it on my front porch. It gets no water and I don't think that I have touched it or barely even looked at it since I bought it. I guess I still have issues over the orchids!
Post #8454905
Quote
themoonhowl Prairieville, LA(Zone 9a) Mar 28, 2011
Sounds like it....grin The whole thing can be hard enough to keep up with, but now taxonomists are deciding that earlier taxonomists made mistakes so whole groups of plants are changing names and pronunciation ....it is a puzzlement for sure.
Post #8455001
Quote
faeden SF Bay Area, CA(Zone 9b) Mar 28, 2011
So sorry to hear of your loss. You must have been devastated! I can understand why you didn't want another orchid for a while.
Moon, for a while now the taxonomists' work has been based on DNA comparisons, so hold your hat for many more changes! After they're done with that, they'll find something else to justify their existence (or at least to continue their reasons for publishing).
Post #8457571
Quote
themoonhowl Prairieville, LA(Zone 9a) Mar 29, 2011
I have a friend who is an Associate Professor of Horticulture at LSU...he tries to keep me up on changes as he gets them....he was telling me a while back that the "powers that be" must be at a loss for ways to create confusion as they distributed a list for the new correct pronunciation of plant names. It seems that aloe (al o) is now A LOW EE and Crinum (cry num) is now CREE NUM. Sheesh
Post #8457876
Quote
faeden SF Bay Area, CA(Zone 9b) Mar 29, 2011
How awful!! I only hope he was pulling your leg. NO ONE who knows these plants (and whatever others which have "new" pronunciations) is going to accept this. I'd like to see that list so I can give it to the people I know who are experts in their fields. They'll make a LOT of noise about these "changes"!
Post #8458234
Quote
themoonhowl Prairieville, LA(Zone 9a) Mar 29, 2011
I will see if Dan still has it. It all stems from the Latin/Greek nomenclature and the "proper" applications of those languages re pronunciation. For years we referred to a group of plants as KUH-LAN-CHO....when it would seem that the proper pronunciation is KAL-AN-KO-EE. Dan's take was that some people had WAY too much time on their hands and that it is hard enough for horticulturists to keep up with the taxonomic changes without having to further confuse the lay gardener with a ton of new ways to say old plant names. I am in complete agreement with him.
You say Leer-ee-ope, I say Luh-rye-oh-pee... let's call the whole thing Lilyturf GRIN
Post #8458329
Quote
Lupala Victoria, BC(Zone 8b) Mar 29, 2011
There are 2 problems with using 'proper' greek/latin pronunciation:
1. There are 2 commonly used forms of Latin today - 'Scientific' and 'Church' - both stem from the same source but interpret the language differently.
2. True Latin has been a dead language for a very long time, and since there are no real recordings or pronunciation guides, it is all just conjecture and guess work mostly based on the two versions currently used, and whatever little historical evidence there may be.
I do agree there should be an attempt to make the pronunciation standard, however I disagree in trying to 'repurify' many of the existing names. Trying to learn and convince others to learn the latin is hard enough.....I can accept the reclassification due to DNA testing, no matter how irritating it can be to try and relearn the new stuff, but changing names for the sake of authenticity, or changing the pronunciations that have been in use for a long time, I am not so supportive of.
After a certain point I think it just become ridiculous. Unless there is a time machine invented, no one will no for certain. And when ones is there will be arguments of which regional dialect is more accurate - Senatorial latin? Rome Latin? Commoner Latin? After a certain point I think reason needs to rear its ugly head and cry 'Enough is enough!'
Post #8458601
Quote
themoonhowl Prairieville, LA(Zone 9a) Mar 29, 2011
Two of my favorite quotes:
Sola bona lingua esta mortua lingua.
and
The English language does not borrow words from other languages...it chases them down a dark alley and mugs them.
Latin courses are taught from the original written word...the pronunciations are anybody's guess, The Vulgate Latin is an entity unto itself.
I agree that they should leave well enough alone in matters of pronunciation. DNA is pretty much irrefutable on the other hand.
Post #8458689
Quote
faeden SF Bay Area, CA(Zone 9b) Mar 29, 2011
Amen! I second both of you!
Post #8458926
Quote
Kiyzersoze Coral Springs, FL(Zone 10b) Mar 29, 2011
Didn't I tell you people not to upset faeden?
Yes, it was hard to see them dying and there was nothing I could do.
I couldn't have said it better! No really, I couldn't have!
Post #8459515
Quote
Wongjky Tsing Yi, Hong Kong Apr 07, 2011
We call this plant Pseudobombax ellipticum (Kunth.) Dugand.
Post #8479786
Quote
faeden SF Bay Area, CA(Zone 9b) Apr 07, 2011
Yes, we already ID'd it in the second post. Then we got off on several tangents, albeit very informative ones. LOL!!
Post #8479790
Quote