Cultivar registration

From: SelbyHort at aol.com on 2000.05.06 at 04:25:32(4538) Bonaventure, Unfortunately the 1995 version of the International Code of Nomenclature for Cultivated Plants (ICNCP) is not available online. You can purchase the book, but it is about $50 US. The two booksellers that I have found with this available are Koeltz or Balough, each with web sites for ordering online. This is not something you can pick up at the local Barnes and Noble nor is it available from Amazon. I think they are making some changes to the Code so there may be a new version out before too long. +More >From what I can understand from the ICNCP, instead of naming the grex, the breeder/registrant selects a single clone and registers it with a cultivar name. The parentage is recorded on the registration form (hopefully this is known), along with description and other known information about the plant's source. From what I can deduce from the rules, this cultivar name might later be used as a "Cultivar Group" name if other cultivars from the same cross are later selected. The cultivar group is kinda like a grex name but not really. It is a way of getting rid of the grex naming concept which is not too accurate a way to name anything. Hypothetical example: You cross Anthurium reflexinervium with Anthurium superbum. You get a really vigorous, strongly bullate, black-leafed plant in the seedling batch and select this out and register it as Anthurium 'Black Ruffles'. Someone else makes this same cross at another time. They get an exciting plant in this batch that looks distinctly different than "Black Ruffles' and register it as Anthurium (Black Ruffles Cultivar Group) 'Wavy Gravy'. If I am not mistaken, this can also be referred to more simply as Anthurium 'Wavy Gravy'. Anyway, this is the way it seems to work. The orchid people get to keep naming grexes but no one else can do this anymore. Orchid cultivars are typically registered only when an award is given to a special clone. The orchid grex name is still registered, but you need to keep in mind that the grex name is actually just a shorter way to express the hybrid cross (so you don't have to write out the formula). People have gotten into the messy habit of only referrring to a grex name when what they actually need to communicate about is a single selected plant from the hybrid swarm. Naming a cultivar, or single clone, is the only way to go if you want to accurately talk about about a specific entity in cultivation with certain stable characteristics. In this way, we all can be on the same wavelength about what we are discussing, propagating, selling and trading with each other. Since we are basically starting out fresh with aroid registration it will be much easier to adapt to the new rules. There are already some older names that have been published and these will be entered into a checklist (I am working on the first of several now) and later published in a Registry (after we pass the checklists around and see if anything needs changing or correcting). After the checklists are done it will be easier to register any new cultivars because then we will know which names were previously used, and not make a mistake in using a duplicate name. The whole point of this is to adher to a set of naming standards, although these standards may change over time, we should at least get everything in sync as much as possible. Cultivars can also be applied to species selected from the wild populations and grown in cultivation for some special characteristics, such as larger leaves, brighter colored flowers, unusual variegation, etc. I hope Wilbert will straighten me out on this if I have made a mistake. I am still trying to deciper the nuances of the ICCP. It is not easy to abolish the idea of grex names in your mind after being involved with orchids, so I can understand the confusion about this issue. I just hope I have not got it all wrong in these examples! I am in the process of writing an explanation of the ICNCP for the purpose of aroid registration and this will go up on the web site, and hopefullly will be published in Aroideana in the future. I still have many questions myself that need answering, but will do my best to help everyone understand what the current Code requires for cultivar registration. Wilbert Hettersheid should also be a great help to us all since he is one of the ICNCP authors. Donna Atwood Selby Gardens << Just joking about the cultivar names. But doesn't one have to make the grex name official. This is what is done in orchid registery and cultivar (or clonal) names are then "fixed" at judging when an official award is given to it (or not) at a judging center or show. Bonaventure >>>>>>>>>>SelbyHort@aol.com on 05/02/2000 05:58:44 PM Just a note about Bonaventure's example with the A. Bloody Giant 'The Best'. To register a cultivar, you will need to select a clone from the cross and apply a cultivar name. Unfortunately you can't use names like 'The Best', or 'Biggest and Greatest' or anything like that when officially registering your cutivars....sorry. >>

From: "Bonaventure W Magrys" magrysbo at shu.edu> on 2000.05.09 at 01:34:35(4550) Yes Donna, thank you, you placed these ideas down very clearly and with more elucidations. I'm glad you can see what perspective I've had of the registration +More process (being familiar with the orchid system) and I can see now that ths cultivar system can be just as exacting and precise, being able to record lineages also. Bonaventure

From: SelbyHort at aol.com on 2000.05.10 at 00:08:23(4557) I can see that there is a big misunderstanding about what a cultivar registrar is supposed to do. First of all, parentage is not required information, although there will be space for this information (if known) on the registration form. We may have some dynomite clone that needs to be registered and not know a thing about its lineage. The plant will still be registered even if nothing is known about how it arose. There may be misidentification of one or both parents, so why bother with recording lineages unless every plant that contributed to the cultivar has been properly identified. This will never happen, folks! There is no verification of orchid hybrids simply because there is no way to identify hybrids, and it is the same with aroids. I am sure to get plants submitted for registration that have incorrectly identified parents. I will just have to register what I get. +More Secondly, it is not up to the registrar to make any value judgements about what is good and acceptable and what is a lousy cultivar. That responsibilty belongs to the breeder or registrant or whoever is submitting the plant for cultivar status. If a person wants to have a legacy of registering worthless material, that is their choice. The only choice a registrar makes if whether there is enough evidence to support accepting or rejecting the cultivar, so in some cases questionable material may be evaluated by another party if needed. The registrar makes no independent decision about whether the clone is "worthy". This kind of judging is not the authority or responsibility of the registrar. I think if the IAS is concerned about quality control, then there will need to be another process for evaluating any registered cultivars, such as a judging program. I will just be keeping the cultivar records, making sure the submitted names are appropriate and comply with the Code, and publishing checklists and Registers. As long as the required information and fee is submitted and the rules of naming are followed, then a cultivar will probably get registered. Donna Atwood Selby Gardens

From: "Bonaventure W Magrys" magrysbo at shu.edu> on 2000.05.10 at 03:11:07(4559) SelbyHort@aol.com on 05/09/2000 08:08:41 PM Please respond to aroid-l@mobot.org To: Multiple recipients of list AROID-L cc: (bcc: Bonaventure W Magrys/ADM/SHU) Subject: Re: Cultivar registration I can see that there is a big misunderstanding about what a cultivar registrar is supposed to do. First of all, parentage is not required information, although there will be space for this information (if known) on the registration form. We may have some dynomite clone that needs to be registered and not know a thing about its lineage. The plant will still be registered even if nothing is known about how it arose. There may be misidentification of one or both parents, so why bother with recording lineages unless every plant that contributed to the cultivar has been properly identified. This will never happen, folks! There is no verification of orchid hybrids simply because there is no way to identify hybrids, and it is the same with aroids. I am sure to get plants submitted for registration that have incorrectly identified parents. I will just have to register what I get. +More Secondly, it is not up to the registrar to make any value judgements about what is good and acceptable and what is a lousy cultivar. That responsibilty belongs to the breeder or registrant or whoever is submitting the plant for cultivar status. If a person wants to have a legacy of registering worthless material, that is their choice. [[[[[[[[[[[[Registering does not mean bringing to the public eye, a good clone may come out of that cross later, then after it is named as a cultivar and judged worthy everyone interested or wanting to promote it will then use that information of its merit - BWM ]]]]]]]]]The only choice a registrar makes if whether there is enough evidence to support accepting or rejecting the cultivar, so in some cases questionable material may be evaluated by another party if needed. The registrar makes no independent decision about whether the clone is "worthy". This kind of judging is not the authority or responsibility of the registrar. I think if the IAS is concerned about quality control, then there will need to be another process for evaluating any registered cultivars, such as a judging program. I will just be keeping the cultivar records, making sure the submitted names are appropriate and comply with the Code, and publishing checklists and Registers. As long as the required information and fee is submitted and the rules of naming are followed, then a cultivar will probably get registered. [[[[[[[[What about if we start making intergenerics. Since we don't require exact parent (species) background, do we have to bother with genus? Also, whats great for an Alocasia may not be as noticable in a Pinellia cultivar, yet are all the Pinallias going to be deemed less worthy? - BWM]]]]]]]]]]]]] Donna Atwood Selby Gardens

From: StellrJ at aol.com on 2000.05.14 at 20:43:41(4577) In a message dated Tue, 9 May 2000 8:08:46 PM Eastern Daylight Time, SelbyHort@aol.com writes: << I can see that there is a big misunderstanding about what a cultivar +More registrar is supposed to do. First of all, parentage is not required information, although there will be space for this information (if known) on the registration form. We may have some dynomite clone that needs to be registered and not know a thing about its lineage. This discussion arose out of confusion over taxonomy, did it not? But certain plants with a long history of cultivation have exited the realm of traditional taxonomy. Take tulips for example. There are classes of cultivars, e.g., Darwin tulips, Mendel tulips, lily-flowered tulips, but these have no specific epithets; there is _Tulipa_ 'Glory of Appledoorn', in which the cultivar name immediately follows the genus, because these plants have been hybridized over and over until their parentage is no longer known. Then there is the class called "Species Tulips," consisting of those relatively few wild-type _Tulipa_ species, and varieties derived from known species. Roses, Narcissi, and Irises have the same situation. Where am I going with this? I am simply saying that perhaps it is time to adopt a similar policy toward aroids. Those whose parentage is not known should be classed in cultivar categories, and questions of species not considered. Jason Hernandez Naturalist-at-Large

From: SelbyHort at aol.com on 2000.05.15 at 22:07:07(4579) To answer Jason's message about cultivars with missing lineage information: The ICNCP does not require parentage information for this very reason. There are many plants long in cultivation that have arisen spontaneously or they exist with no records about their history. Aroids are no exception. There will be attempts to collect any known information about parentage at the time of registration, but the whole point of registration is to link the name to a specific clone, make sure the name complies with naming standards, and to ensure that there are no legal confusions with registered trademarks or patented names. A Register of cultivar names will be produced and printed. This will make it much easier to register future cultivars, since we want to be sure we are not using the same name for two different cultivars. Donna Atwood +More << << I can see that there is a big misunderstanding about what a cultivar registrar is supposed to do. First of all, parentage is not required information, although there will be space for this information (if known) on the registration form. We may have some dynomite clone that needs to be registered and not know a thing about its lineage. This discussion arose out of confusion over taxonomy, did it not? But certain plants with a long history of cultivation have exited the realm of traditional taxonomy. Take tulips for example. There are classes of cultivars, e.g., Darwin tulips, Mendel tulips, lily-flowered tulips, but these have no specific epithets; there is _Tulipa_ 'Glory of Appledoorn', in which the cultivar name immediately follows the genus, because these plants have been hybridized over and over until their parentage is no longer known. Then there is the class called "Species Tulips," consisting of those relatively few wild-type _Tulipa_ species, and varieties derived from known species. Roses, Narcissi, and Irises have the same situation. Where am I going with this? I am simply saying that perhaps it is time to adopt a similar policy toward aroids. Those whose parentage is not known should be classed in cultivar categories, and questions of species not considered. >>

From: "Culture Sheet" <team at culturesheet.org> on 2008.11.23 at 18:20:02(18750) A small thank you to the people who went through the effort of slipstreaming cultivar registration for aroids. I've been waiting for this a long, long time. +More regards, Fred http://culturesheet.org _______________________________________________ Aroid-L mailing list Aroid-L@www.gizmoworks.com http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l

Note: this is a very old post, so no reply function is available.