taxonomy, phylogeny and cultonomy

From: "Peter Boyce" p.boyce at rbgkew.org.uk> on 2001.06.25 at 15:46:15(6877) All Wilbert's email concerning cultons and cultonomy has got me to thinking (well, something had to) that with the leaps in techniques and tools available to taxonomists that have been made in the past decade it might be time to review what we call ourselves, based on what we do. +More My primary interest is in elucidating species and genera in the family Araceae. Species, genera and familes are taxa. I am studying the morphological differences and similarities between these taxa. I am a taxonomist. I have a student who uses the taxa I recognize to try to elucidate the processes that lead to species being evolutionarily related. This process is called phylogenetics and the resulting framework of related taxa is called a phylogeny. Is she, therefore, a phylogenist? Wilbert has an active interest in cultivated manifestations of taxa. These are called cultons. Is Wilbert thus a cultonomist? Answers in an email, please? ---------------------------- Peter Boyce Herbarium Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew Richmond, Surrey TW9 3AE Tel. (+44) (0)20 8 332 5207 fax. (+44) (0)20 8 332 5278 email: p.boyce@rbgkew.org.uk (work) boyce@pothos.demon.co.uk (home)

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