I
CURRENTSTATEOF Botanical Nomenclature I Gerry Moore
r n July 2005, changes to the 13th edition of the International Code of (?tamcal Nomenclature UBA Greuter et al., 2000) were authorized at the NomencLature Section assembly at the Seventeenth International Botanical Congress inVienna,Austria. One hun dred years ago (1905), the first interna tional code of botanical nomenclature was prepared at the Second Inter national Botanical Congress in Vienna.
Development of Botanical The prairie crabapple, Ma/us ioensi5 (Alph.Wood) Britton by Maud H. Purdy, 1934, Nomenclature watercolor. Courtesy BrooklynBotanic Garden. More work by this early 20th century The early development of botanical botanical artist can be found at www.bbg.org/lib/specialcollectionslpurdy/. nomenclature was essentially a struggle to tease apart the two primary elements of plant taxonomy—classification and circumscription method when applying botanical nomenclature; see 5ymbolae nomenclature. Most significant was the names. Such an approach was unsatisfac Botanicae Upsatienses 33:3 for pro development of the type concept, not tory because it was often not clear when ceedings.) fully recognized in the botanical code revisions in a taxon’s circumscription jus Combining the type method and the until 1935 (Briquet, 1935; see also tified the changing of the taxon’s name. principle of priority makes the process Nicolson, 1991).A type (the cultivated The other major debate in the early of applying names clear. Revisions in a code uses the term nomenctaturat development of botanical nomenclature taxon’s circumscription, no matter how standard) refers to the one element was determining to what extent priority large or small, that result in the inclu that remains permanently attached to should be limited.This led to the estab sion of a type of a name at the same a taxon name.The type method allows lishment of Unnaeus’s 1753 publication rank with priority over the name in use for a clear distinction between an Species Plantarum as a starting point will result in a change in that taxon’s organism’s name and the taxon (i.e., a in botanical nomenclature (some bryo name. For example, if the genus, Mattis taxonomic group at any rank) represent phytes, fungi, algae and all fossils have Mill.(type: iilcitus sytz’estris Mill.), ed by that name.With the type method, later starting pc)ifltS).(In 2003, the apples, were circumscribed broadly so names are assigned types while taxa I Jniversitv of Uppsala celebrated the as to include the type of the genus are circumscribed. Prior to the type 250th anniversary of Species Plantarum name Pyrus L., Pcommztnis L.,the method, many taxonomists applied a with a symposium on Unnaeus and pear, then this broadly circumscribed
34 PUBLICGARDEN
I
4
)
fattts.
Carnith. (i.e.,
Schneid., (Alph.Wood) variety by
corOnCiria original
ioenestc tion agreements a
resulted of name described
under rank, excellent increases position (e.g., limits
respect onomy clature the categories two)
taxonomic class, taxon ognized
include circumscribed broadly (e.g.,
names,
case, change
the
concepts to
rank of
tion
genus
to
bee:
species
ill
opinion
lilciUde a the
multiple
The
Besides
rank
n’s
taxon
affect
type
(i.e.,
components
that
species.
use
do
Rhododendron
authors
and mandatory
M
are
four
involves
would
publication
of for
such
Changes
(e.g.,
when
name.
prairie
to
these
to
designation:
not
in
in
(Mph.Wood) this
involves
cornaria
of
do
Pynts
in
of
belongs).This
position.This
the
rank
example under
Malits
Rhododendron
by
(e.g.,
the
information
include the
species).
var.
different
as
other
the
hierarchy.This
genus;
circumscription,
Mattts family
names
regarding
an
result
not
as
name
subspecies, determining
Alphonso
Britton, have
go
value
to
species).
it
For
form
types
ioensis
and
narrowly
prairie
assigning earlier
crabappLe
Rhodora
ioensis
is
the result
this
in
by
endings
coronaria
genera;
working
of
example,
broadly
binominal
var. genus,
in
of
applied
species
or
of
when
position. a was
of
Determining
the
names the
same
Mains
defining
plant’s
of
taxon’s
a
li
the
circumscribed
how
Pyrtts)
name
the
Likhonos, circtimscription,
crabapple
ioensis.
Alph.Wood)
in
change
retrieval.
Wood
later
published
Alph.Wood) name
name
ordering
coronaria
so
Rhododendron
or
it
L.
genus
for
species) the
division/phylum,
there
provides
to
system taxon
determination
across
circumscribed L.
besides formerly
a
different
to
In
as
variety)
ioensis
the
generic
L.
at
Ranking
generic
the
which
plant
does
ranks
circumscrip
and incitision
nomen
a
was
one
J-j’rus,
in
will
this
under
not
Differences
in
the
taxon’s
are
name name
/14.
other
name
1860
going
a
process
the
the
rank
with
not
of
first of
to latter
prior
can
Wood’s
take
taxon’s
same
above
an
dis
subsp.
genus
has
posi
rec
taxon
C.K.
the
the
the
a
tax
of
as
go
a
when
hybrids,
include ute
that stable has under wild for sicum whereby
retains that the plant code, unique
nomic plants ings independent with
defined covered cultivated addressed Mill., vent
a nomenclature the the ti()n, clature
Group. al., (‘ultivated 2004, apparent correct example, rejected
national developed Cultivated species usage
rank
2004)
The
animals,
In
Occasionally
or
cultivated
been
little-used tomato,
may
is
unique
position,
this,
or
has respect
taxon
unlike
the
propagated
even
in
1952,
combination whose the
clearly
recognized
(L.)
unit
those
The
can
needs
is
name
clones,
two
can
as
topovanants
in
in
these
be
been
the
selected names
that
was
there
Code
seventh
cultivated
botanical
code
“an
by
H.Karst.
because
Plants
the
order
of
he
when
Lvcopersicon
bacteria,
whether
he
an
to
recognized
primary
the
characteristics.” to
of
commonly
the
distinct, Code
names
for
and
plants
that Lycopersicon
the
published.The
code
assemblage
for
characteristics, destabilizing
conserved,
plants
botanical
international
graft-chimaeras,
officially
of
are
covers
the
the
codes
of
this
to
this
botanical
cultivated
Nomenclature
there
cultivated
by edition
for
rank.
in
flc’NCP,
were
families,
official
it
are
of botanical
taxon’s
is
maintain
code
is
in
and
are
that
method
categories
it
(plants
appropriate
in
a
species
had
uniform,
the
attributes,
to
of
special
occurs
cultivation
particular
cuttivar
In
as
is
cultivation
not
conserved
regulated
used
code.
viruses,
be
code.The
nomenclature
if
esculentum
of
basic become
otherwise agreement
of
order
mechanisms
Brickell
code.
circtlmscrip
it
genera,
to
lj’coper
readily
plants
named
code
the code
grown
plants
cultivated
usage.
of
would
code.Any
is
Entities
name
and
group
in current
and
lines,
taxo
assigned
of
nomen
and
Inter
to
and
is
for
In
the
attrib
means
and
of
that,
had
by
was
not
pre
not
or
or
et
that
For
for
be
the
is
Aerides
cultivated
Nomenclature geotis
cal nomenclatural ambiguous on Rhododendron
cases and ensuring of and and tion grex Whereas
a (botanical,
used Crataemespilus (+). up Daphne
Changes are plants the plants, plants.The
sents als hybrids represents multiplication placed grouping
Crataegzts maera Group, ti()n similarity from
The type,
clearly
characters),
particular
accomplishing
produced
the
The
code of
Two
indicated
cultivated
For
Renanthera
rank
Handbook
Registration with
marks
category
to
with
where
a
tissues
nomenclatural
which
or
naming
distinguishable
after
cross
and
Tuttpa
two
denote example,
between
Renades
other
xburkwooctii
and
that
hybrids
bear
together
known
groups
Cultivar
code
from
cultivar
ctiltivated)
and
the
(e.g., Group
or
in
grex
circumscription,
and
the
codes
application
between
the
from
through
using
originated
each
would
only is
code
symbol
categories
Classification
of
committees
graft-chimaeras
Breeders
Mespittts,
of an
2006
can represents
on
a
boothil
Latin
genetically
limited
Picea
Arunothy
A
Commission
imschootiana.
of
Cultivated are
these
(Greatwood parentage.
+crataegomespitus
their
grexes
particular
and
category
assemblage two
names
cultivars,
of
taxonomic graft-chimaera
one
the
Orchid
are
provide plants
indicated
create
change,
nomenclature
name
ISSUE do
artificial
Aerides
(x),
Group
by
abies
‘Carol
primary
or
two addition
the
correct
to
Mishmiense
through
Group).
of
can
an whereas
recognized
in
one
more
graft-chimaeras
based
orchids
intergeneric
Nomenclature
for
the grex graft-chi
THREE
is
modified
genera.The
a
in
Plants area
individual
assistance.
For
excellent
single
‘Little
position,
be
Mackie’,
the
disadvanta
epithets
et
used
for
or
group of
between
the Roman
roseum hybridiza
by
codes
name.
goal
different
found
example, symbol
al., repre
Details
that
on
grafting.
individu more
various
the
is
the
botani
for
and quota
Gem’,
for
1993).
made
their
of
with
in
are
are
In job
the
are in
35 is
are
the
of
tax
not
have
that
date
adver
floras that
or
they
draw
model
on
as
(1995,
the
they
as
Website
are
Pro
to)
they
past
a
(®),
uses
by either
that
horticultur
those
One marketing
informa
PIAN7S
information
Plant
by
name
Names
consult
“preferred
taxonc)rnic the
been
a
author,
such
International
(hua.huh.har
Peter
correct a
taxonomic
Office
names,
monographs, the
of
.html)
IOPI’s
get
(i.e.,
However,
because
not
States
the
International
web-based
because
judgments.
in
Nomenclature
the
Over
names,
(e.g.,
company
make
availahle.This
getting
wehsites—and
IJSI)A’s
Information
Pbytogeny Gtobdd
is
information
should
Checklist
of
Berendsohn
make largely
registered
by
under
taxa”; Patent
Nomenclature
patent
he
have
for
is
addressed
available,
the
or
America
and that
many
article
do
what
the
either
united
concepts
Plant
constructing.
single
classifications
published
names
Plant
Trademark
Plants.
taxon
floras—to
nct
Code
Users
popular
and
use
a
by
and
model.
the
Walter
(ni)
this
that
that
been
user
the
for
cukivar
are
the
taxonomic
publication).
North
and
a
by
and classifications
is in
may
include
in
plant
trademarked
(plants.usda.gov, and
“potential
plant
quite
of
Provisional
maintained
of
has
Botanical
resources
Angiosperm
Global
databases
a
databases
becoming
tell
recently
different
given
using
make of
and
the
allowing
of
to
a
Patent
regulated
(‘uttit’c,ted
are
Trademark
years,
about
not .htm,
place
tnide.Their
the
Flora
l)atahases
no)t
tise
tool
al
30 become
unregistered
code
addressed International
(www.uspto.gov), not
U.S.
regulated
1997)
Trademark
Berendsohn’s for
visional
taxa”
developed
problem
accepted)
alternative
back
judgments
taxonomists
on
treatments
course
onornic
that
for
vardedu/FNA.
plantnet.rhgsyd.nsw.gwau/iopi/iopig
pci
checklist
Organization
Stevens’s web),
(www.mohot.orgJMOBOT/Research/AP
judgments
name
do
Database
and
will
tion
excellent
tus/reveal/phio/fam/inspvl
he
as
is
with
your
it
used.
other
in
plant
many
of
toma
are
exam
infor
also
discov to
as
I)espite
United plants.
debates
lycoper search
of
into
of
progress
are
the Index
name
these
duat classifica
the
the
of
for
Nesom).
divaricatus
to
may
persists,
taxonomists
genus
new
frustration
and
of
agree
probably the names
such
(L.
the
that
for
that
common
name users
Ericaceae,
edu/botany/ing)
associated
is
Mill., Nominum
their
medicine.Your
the
considers
eastern
and
treatments
place.
scientific
have
previously
Aster
with
Nommum
Names
merged
20f)6).
fuel
behind
treatments
treatments
pace
as
and
the
the
the
Solanum
plant
true
expect
tomato of
ailment
you
the
Ptantarttm
that
name
the
one
he
(and
of
changes
was
indices,
of
now to
of
of
and
of
20t)3).Therefore,
an
Plant
what taking Indices
such
also
Araceae,
Index
names
classification
pace
being
collectively
ravenel.si.
is
from
divarticata
Mani()n,
Scrophulariaceae.
reasons
(www.life.umd.edu/emeri
for
circumscriptions
confusion
taxonomists
when
what
are educate
and are
users
minds
compare
received,
it
presented
should
escuteitttim
aster
correct
name
one
taxonomic
will
plant
to
nomenclature
the
Canada,
proposed
the
researching
number
proposed
used
that
Reveal’s
on
2004;
the
than
the
in
1993
treatment
their
research, (e.g.,
unrealistic
in
on
including
many
two
when
science.
and Eu;yba
wood
conservation
L.
catising
different
is
in
of
for
have changes
Jim
ragenericorum
International
accelerated
those
Nomenclatural
is
It
surprising
However,
agree
These
any
and
consequently
Vascular/nm
Genericorum
and
Sup
(wwwipni.org),
changes the
names
important
mation
APG
tions)
change
agreement
furthermore,
to
L.
under
States
white
among ple,
(Valleau,
this
ery
changes
increased
Such
of
different
currently
doctor’s grandparents
much
fields
not
concerning
Solanum,
to)
sicum
some
usage
Ll’copersicon
changes Plantaginaceae,
formal
Lvcopersicon
families,
to
is
of
he
13
fbr
to
plant
to
may
be
pro-
taxon
he
etastei;
in
taxon
to
the
plant
the
change
in
taxono
one posi
debate
new are
Aster.
rank
(sensu
names
genera,
debates
insta
say led
of
native
major
to)
of
1)oeltin-
of
under
in
should Amp
classifica
species
when
been
lonactis,
lead
some
No
Group
of
same
with and
should
methods
leading
only
disagree
disagree
up
should
authors
classification.
concepts
placed
have
proposed
Psilactis,
others
is codes
among
basic
times
in
only
the
changes
smaller
insights
system
life
180+
plant
j’bia,
species
taxonomy.
circumscription,
also
different
assist
remain
concepts
changes
of
these
legitimate
the
to
our being
plants
recently
I)NA)
debates:
there
are
Ear
165
new
Modern while
of
splitting
how
not
Similarly
in
taxon
Si’rnphvofrithurn
under
recently
different
However,
Asia
oftentimes
Phylogeny
upon
indeed
nomenclatural using
phylogenies
several
a
with
current striking
circumscription,
constructed.
—Atmutaste;;
Chioracantha,
now
how
have
that
relationships
(e.g.,
the
narrow
of
words,
and
these
core
and has
and
—changes
are
will
does
do
respect reconstruction
for
he
the
into
our
plant.
Oreosteinnui,
or
significant
plant
kingdoms
the
that
disagreements
to
data
stricto)
agreed thus,
state GARDEN
of
1994)—while
changes
genera
in
from
position.
taxonomy. of
other
rank
workers
definitions,
with
of
these
2003)
source
an
plants
proposing
name include
Eucephatus,
America
same has
Aster
how
Europe
regarding
In
regarding
should
broad
groups.These
many
is
Angiosperm
of
and
approximately
and
PUBLIC
sensu
Some
codes
plant
And
the
However,
36
(1998,
Ocleinena,
The
(Nesom,
from
Canadan
Seriocwpus,
separate
North
the
genus
germ,
taxonomy
posed
species recognized.
how
ornists
tions
immune
reconstructed
ments
classified.The about
significant
classifications.They mists
resulting
standing
profound plant
sources
phylogenetic
for
nothing
name.
lato,
different apply
for
ti()n,
rank,
ments
there
correct
bility
The
greatest nomenclature
for Agriculture’s
plant
erned inevitable.
can Conclusion rounding
proprietary
differ
cultivar Office.A Protection reproduce prietaiy
sought a name)
Patents plant IGBN
state” seedlings, of
applies mutants, reproduced he
a able are are
scientific
“invented
cultivars same companies
trademark mark itself) only
Only
developer
plant
plant,
granted
As
further
Some
not not
take
for
that
classification,
the
or
from
names
company
or
by
is
long
and
by
cultivar.
to
are freely published
LS.PTO.,
name.
use
rights
a trademarked;
including
ICNGP—most
solace
patent
hybrids,
that
the
name
patents
company
community—they
growers
other
plant
or
the
However,
requesting
name
discussion
from sexually
is
a
a
as
the
may
protection
as
of
any
to
plant’s plant
Plant
JOIN discovered
in
it
available
there
whole
See
over
a cultivar
only
the
in
(not
sells.
In
may
name
found
effect
than
apply
the
distinct
cultivar
2003).The that
and
and
Avent
that
in
order
Variety
also
cultivated
patent
name
and
same is
(i.e.,
that
are
trademark
tJ.S. means
users
also the
Since
accordance
plant
a
it
a
newly
authorized
of
trademarks.
or
therefore,
for
in
different
for
tuber-propagated
names.
obtain
for
for
Certificate
KNCP,
fluctuations
significantly
owns
plant
by plant.
for
and
the and
(1999, I)epartment
to
designation
apply
an
cultivar
changes
twenty
they
Protection
of
names
cultivars use
such
(not
available
maintain
seed)
growers
patent
uncultivated
found
issues
are
new
plant asexually
sports,
to
patents
cultivar
In
in
must
names
the
there
2003)
trade
the
names
different
not
different
with
to
the
the
gov and
years.
can
variety
are
of
names
sur
same
that
use.
in
they
avail
for have
to
pro
U.S.,
may
of
he the
for
or
the
Brjckefl,
Berendsohn, Avent,T.
Avent,T.
Angiosperm
Berendsohn,W. Angiosperm
ACKNOWLEI)GEMENTS
The
LITERATt
KIlN
trademark
Geny position
since taken
applied should
txon
Model. tial
tion Linnean
Portland, Production name Botanical
ing of flowering
cation Pan,
Pat
preparation
ordinal
the
following
I)eJrnrbnent
Jonas, Botanic
data” YOI*,
plants:AP(i
model
Mark
the
Moore,
or
for
with
is
Angiosperm
C.
for
2003
he
1999.The
Thxon
classification
to
IRE
I\’
not
ICNGP.
and
1k.
tn
I)., Society
Oregon:
names
same
and
Tehhitt,JohnWiersma.
Guy
the
plants.
only
Garden
names
W. different
Phylogeny
Phylogeny
for
datahases.
a
..co
15
t
a
of
B.
Garden
:rrEI)
are
rank.
PhD.,
particular
(1. G.
name).
orders
46:
Nesom,
can
(10):
hotanical
It
this
II.
Thu
trademark
one
1997. 1995.The
thanked
trademark
Annals
Baum,W
of such
i4t:
not
Timher
283-31)9.
Botanical
to
Phylogeny
85:331—553.
manuscript:
be
No
60—66.
Want
Science
Lc
br
taxa
correct
and
Nursery
in
the
399—436.
A governed
Group.
Group.
Taxon
I)an
contacted
I)irector
as
such
taxonomic
the
Brooklyn,
datahases:
of
Press.
circumscription,
families
in
to
same
trademark
l.A.
concept
and
Nicolson,
myth
the
helping
Journal
name
families
,S’tart
at
44:
2003.An
1998.An
solace
Management
Group
name
Hetterscheid,
different
I)avid
Brooki
Missouri
taxon.
of
207—212.
by
(when
of
at
a
the
can
of”poten
informa
the
Neu,
Nurser):
with
of
the
for
classifi
Mae
of
can
Horak,
names,
update
It)PI
‘n
the he
a
a
my
he
&
Valleau,J.2004.
tJnited Nicolson,
Nesom,
Manion,J.T.
Greuter,W,J.
(ireatwood,J.,
Briquet,J.
Acta
plant
ence, general
www.uspto.gov/go/pac/doc/ Jena.
General Botanical
nomenclature.
V.
change
the MS August
sensu Botanical Code) I).
of International
International Botanical
C. claiure
Horticultural A.
141-307. Cambridge, of
edition).Regnuin
and
1993.
Demoulin,T.
Silva,J.
C.
Botanical
1.
Nomenclature
Thesis.
New
J.
Hawksworth,
blort.
Leslie,J.
angry
States
nomenclatural H.
The
lato (1.
adopted
protocols
1999.
and
D.
Information
Wiersema.
1935.
World
L.
F.
Congress,
handbook
2006.An
(Astenceae:Asterae) Cornell
Garden
Nomenclature
1991
(ISHS)
Review
McNeill,
growers
Patent Skog,
Nomenclature
Registration
P
193(l.Verlag
Regnum
McNeill,
Plant Society,
Orchid
International
Annals
Botanical
F
S.
hy
species.
.A
Hunt,
Filguebras,
for
PTrehane,
634:
used
Vegetabile
history University.
the 2(100.
and
7%:
of
name
201)4.
analysis
St
ER.
and
Concerning
Commission. Cultivated
I.ondon.
the
references
on P.Trehane,
Louis,
6 33-56.
of Sixteenth PJ.
Vegetabile
Trademark
by
3-66.
1994.
International
Barrie,
confused
von
changes:
the
International
Congress
taxonomy
Orchid
(4th
Crihh,J.
public
of
(Saint I).
ci
N.J.Turland,
Missouri,July
hotanical
Missouri
of Rules
i44:
Gustav
Phytologia
‘ised
H.
Edition).
preferred
emphasizing
H.
Plants
Nicolson,
International
EVrogtman,
and
Patents.
Noinen
gardens.
13%: Louis
1-123.
Office.
Good
M. Stewart.
Royal
6)’
of
of
of
Fischer,
Burdet,
name
Code
the
1-44.
(7th
Aster
Code
sci
and
77: P.