DOCSLIB.ORG

Botanical Nomenclature: Concept, History of Botanical Nomenclature

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Botanical Nomenclature: Concept, History of Botanical Nomenclature Module – 15; Content writer: AvishekBhattacharjee Module 15: Botanical Nomenclature: Concept, history of botanical nomenclature (local and scientific) and its advantages, formation of code. Content writer: Dr.AvishekBhattacharjee, Central National Herbarium, Botanical Survey of India, P.O. – B. Garden, Howrah – 711 103. Module – 15; Content writer: AvishekBhattacharjee Botanical Nomenclature:Concept – A name is a handle by which a mental image is passed. Names are just labels we use to ensure we are understood when we communicate. Nomenclature is a mechanism for unambiguous communication about the elements of taxonomy. Botanical Nomenclature, i.e. naming of plants is that part of plant systematics dealing with application of scientific names to plants according to some set rules. It is related to, but distinct from taxonomy. A botanical name is a unique identifier to which information of a taxon can be attached, thus enabling the movement of data across languages, scientific disciplines, and electronic retrieval systems. A plant’s name permits ready summarization of information content of the taxon in a nested framework. A systemofnamingplantsforscientificcommunicationmustbe international inscope,andmustprovideconsistencyintheapplicationof names.Itmustalsobeacceptedbymost,ifnotall,membersofthe scientific community. These criteria led, almost inevitably, to International Botanical Congresses (IBCs) being the venue at which agreement on a system of scientific nomenclature for plants was sought. The IBCs led to publication of different ‘Codes’ which embodied the rules and regulations of botanical nomenclature and the decisions taken during these Congresses. Advantages ofBotanical Nomenclature: Though a common name may be much easier to remember, there are several good reasons to use botanical names for plant identification. Common names are not unique to a specific plant. Different species of plants (might not even be related) may have the same common name or vice-versa. Gardeners of different countries have different set of common names for the plants. Due to the difference in language and culture, it could be very difficult for an Indian gardener to share her horticulture experience of some particular species with a gardener in China. Further, the plants which are less Module – 15; Content writer: AvishekBhattacharjee common,do not have any common name. Therefore, every plant must have only one correct botanical name, the earliest that is in accordance with the rules(except in specified cases). The purpose of giving a botanical name to a taxonomic group is not to indicate its characters or history, but to supply a means of referring to it and to indicate its taxonomic rank.For this purpose there is need a precise and simple system of nomenclature that is used in all countries, dealing on the one hand with the terms that denote the ranks of taxonomic groups or units, and on the other hand with the scientific names that are applied to the individual taxonomic groups. The Botanical Nomenclature aims at the provision of a stable method of naming taxonomic groups, avoiding and rejecting the use of names that may cause error or ambiguity or throw science into confusion. Next in importance is the avoidance of the useless creation of names. Other considerations, such as absolute grammatical correctness, regularity or euphony of names, more or less prevailing custom, regard for persons, etc., notwithstanding their undeniable importance, are relatively accessory. History of botanical nomenclature and formation of Code: The early Egyptians and Greeks named many food plants and others with medicinal properties. One of the most important early works was by the Greek, Theophrastus, who recognized the difference between what we now call monocotyledons and dicotyledons. There was, then, not a lot of botanical progress until about the 16thcentury, when a number of useful works were printed, mainly 'herbals', which were among the first literature produced in Ancient Egypt, China, India, and Europe as the medical wisdom of the day accumulated by herbalists, apothecaries and physicians.For several centuries the plant-names appeared as polynomial – long descriptive phases, often difficult to remember. For example, the humble tomato was given the long Latin polynomial Solanumcauleinermiherbaceofoliispinnatisincisis which means the 'Solanum Module – 15; Content writer: AvishekBhattacharjee with the smooth stem which is herbaceous and has incised pinnate leaves'. In 1620, Swiss Caspar Bauhin introduced the concept of binomial nomenclature under which the name of a species consists of two parts – the first is the name of the genus, i.e. generic name and the second is the specific epithet. Bauhin, however, did not use binomial nomenclature for all the species and it was Linnaeus who firmly established this system of naming in his ‘Species Plantarum’(Linnaeus, 1753). The early rules of nomenclature were set forth By Linnaeus in his ‘Criticabotanica’ (1737) and further amplified in ‘Philosohiabotanica’ (1751). Even after Linnaeus’s Species Plantarum’ some significant works in botany were published where the plants were named but without following binomial nomenclature. Van Rheede, the Dutch Governor of Cochin (Kerala, India), a soldier who had no training in botany, became fascinated by the flora of Malabar, compiled and published a unique 12-volume work -‘HortusMalabaricus’ between 1678 and 1693 where he provided brief descriptions of plants, their illustrations, their smell, taste and practical values under their Malayalam names.AugustinPyramus de Candolle in his ‘Théorieélémentaire de la botanique’ (Candolle, 1813)introduced a new classification system and the word ‘taxonomy’. He gavea nice discussion of nomenclature of what might be termed good practices with examplesand favored priority except in the few cases. Steudel in his ‘Nomenclatorbotanicus’ (1821) provided Latin names for all flowering plants known to him together with their synonyms. But theschisms began with the 1843 British Association for the Advancement of Science approval of Zoological rules and became manifest with the1867 Paris Congress approval of Alphonse de Candolle's botanical "laws".On 1August1867 Alphonse de Candolle finished the cornerstone work of botanicalnomenclature for the meeting of the International Botanical Congress of 16 August 1867 in Paris. This 60-page paper (‘Lois de la nomenclature botanique’) has 11 pages ofintroduction, 19 pages of Module – 15; Content writer: AvishekBhattacharjee "laws" in 68 articles, and 28 pages of commentary. Year of publication (1753) of Linnaeus’s ‘Species Plantarum’was made the starting point for plant nomenclature and the rule of priority was made fundamental. The modern successor to Candolle’s ‘Lois’ is the ‘International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants’ (ICN), the most recent published editionof which appeared in 2012 and was based on the decisions taken at the XVIII International Botanical Congress held in Melbourne in 2011.It is worth noting that the 1867-Rules or Candolle’s laws (Candolle, 1867) was not enforced like the current Code(s). It was "adopted by the assembly as the best guide to followfor botanical nomenclature". Since 1867, there have been three main phases in the history of the rules governing the nomenclature of plants. 1) 1867-1905: during this time it became clear that, whereas many of the broad principles of Candolle’s ‘Lois’(e.g. a single correct name and priority of publication in choice between names) were generally accepted, their application in practice was unclear leading to major differences of interpretation and hence disagreement; 2) 1905-1947: the consequent establishment of more detailed ‘International Rules of Botanical Nomenclature’, the ‘American Code’ schism, and its resolution; 3) 1947-present: successive editions (12 to date) of the Code, revised to a relatively minor degree at each International Botanical Congress. 1867-1905: Candolle’s Lois to International Rules – The application, and some of the principles of the Lois formulated by Alphonse de Candolle in 1867 and endorsed as “le meilleur guide a suivre pour la nomenclature botanique” (the best guide to follow for botanical nomenclature), proved controversial, leading both to divergent practice and to the desire for more definitive rules. Module – 15; Content writer: AvishekBhattacharjee For example, the Lois said that botanical nomenclature started with Linnaeus, it did not specify a particular date - not a problem for species names, but Linnaeus had been publishing generic names since 1737, and often changed his view between 1737 and 1753. The contemporary rise of "Darwinism" added to the divisiveness. By the late 1800s, various botanical centres had or were evolving modified or different rules/Codes from the Candolle’s laws. The first mention of what will be known as the "Kew Rule" was by Henry Trimen in 1877 which was against the strict application of the Principle of Priority. According to the Kew Rule: "Our practice is to take the name under which any given plant is first placed in its true genus as the name to be kept up, even though the author of it may have ignored the proper rule of retaining the specific name [epithet], when transferring it from its old genus to the new." The Kew Rule was opposed by Alphonse de Candolle, but supporters perceived it asapplying the Principle of Priority by maintaining the oldest applicable (binomial) name. In the meantime a botanical club (with N.L. Britton) held a meeting
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Mnemonic Memory Taxonomy
    MNEMONIC MEMORY TAXONOMY Overview: In this lesson, students determine proper classification of organisms according to taxonomic levels, explore characteristics that determine classification, and create methods to recall ordered taxonomic terminology. Objectives: The student will: • describe the use and function of a taxonomy, specifically to order and classify living organisms; and • identify and list taxonomic levels of biological classification. Targeted Alaska Grade Level Expectations: Science [7] SC2.2 The student demonstrates an understanding of the structure, function, behavior, development, life cycles, and diversity of living organisms by identifying the seven levels of classification of organisms. [7] SA1.1 The student demonstrates an understanding of the processes of science by asking questions, predicting, observing, describing, measuring, classifying, makign generalizations, inferring, and communicating. Vocabulary: animalia— one of six kingdoms, including most living things that are able to move and digest food internally plantae –one of six kingdoms, including living things that generally manufacture their own food through the use of photosynthesis fungi – one of six kingdoms, mostly living things that are nonmobile and assist in the decomposition process, including yeasts, molds, and mushrooms binomial nomenclature – a scientific naming system that gives a unique name (“scientific name”) to each species, using organisms’ genus and species as its two parts (e.g., “Homo sapiens” for humans) class – a taxonomic rank below
    [Show full text]
  • Linn E and Taxonomy in Japan: on the 300Th Anniversary of His Birth
    No. 3] Proc. Jpn. Acad., Ser. B 86 (2010) 143 Linne and taxonomy in Japan: On the 300th anniversary of his birth By Akihito (His Majesty The Emperor of Japan) (Communicated by Koichiro TSUNEWAKI, M.J.A.) President, dear friends bers of stamens belonged to dierent classes, even when their other characteristics were very similar, I am very grateful to the Linnean Society of while species with the same number of stamens be- London for the kind invitation it extended to me to longed to the same class, even when their other participate in the celebration of the 300th anniver- characteristics were very dierent. This led to the sary of the birth of Carl von Linne. When, in 1980, I idea that the classication of organisms should be was elected as a foreign member of the Society, I felt based on a more comprehensive evaluation of all I did not really deserve the honour, but it has given their characteristics. This idea gained increasing me great encouragement as I have tried to continue support, and Linne’s classication system was even- my research, nding time between my ofcial duties. tually replaced by systems based on phylogeny. Today, I would like to speak in memory of Carl The binomial nomenclature proposed by Linne, von Linne, and address the question of how Euro- however, became the basis of the scientic names of pean scholarship has developed in Japan, touching animals and plants, which are commonly used in the upon the work of people like Carl Peter Thunberg, world today, not only by people in academia but also Linne’s disciple who stayed in Japan for a year as by the general public.
    [Show full text]
  • Alyssum) and the Correct Name of the Goldentuft Alyssum
    ARNOLDIA VE 1 A continuation of the BULLETIN OF POPULAR INFORMATION of the Arnold Arboretum, Harvard University VOLUME 26 JUNE 17, 1966 NUMBERS 6-7 ORNAMENTAL MADWORTS (ALYSSUM) AND THE CORRECT NAME OF THE GOLDENTUFT ALYSSUM of the standard horticultural reference works list the "Madworts" as MANYa group of annuals, biennials, perennials or subshrubs in the family Cru- ciferae, which with the exception of a few species, including the goldentuft mad- wort, are not widely cultivated. The purposes of this article are twofold. First, to inform interested gardeners, horticulturists and plantsmen that this exception, with a number of cultivars, does not belong to the genus Alyssum, but because of certain critical and technical characters, should be placed in the genus Aurinia of the same family. The second goal is to emphasize that many species of the "true" .~lyssum are notable ornamentals and merit greater popularity and cul- tivation. The genus Alyssum (now containing approximately one hundred and ninety species) was described by Linnaeus in 1753 and based on A. montanum, a wide- spread European species which is cultivated to a limited extent only. However, as medicinal and ornamental garden plants the genus was known in cultivation as early as 1650. The name Alyssum is of Greek derivation : a meaning not, and lyssa alluding to madness, rage or hydrophobia. Accordingly, the names Mad- wort and Alyssum both refer to the plant’s reputation as an officinal herb. An infu- sion concocted from the leaves and flowers was reputed to have been administered as a specific antidote against madness or the bite of a rabid dog.
    [Show full text]
  • Coastal Marine Habitats Harbor Novel Early-Diverging Fungal Diversity
    Fungal Ecology 25 (2017) 1e13 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Fungal Ecology journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/funeco Coastal marine habitats harbor novel early-diverging fungal diversity * Kathryn T. Picard Department of Biology, Duke University, Durham, NC, 27708, USA article info abstract Article history: Despite nearly a century of study, the diversity of marine fungi remains poorly understood. Historical Received 12 September 2016 surveys utilizing microscopy or culture-dependent methods suggest that marine fungi are relatively Received in revised form species-poor, predominantly Dikarya, and localized to coastal habitats. However, the use of high- 20 October 2016 throughput sequencing technologies to characterize microbial communities has challenged traditional Accepted 27 October 2016 concepts of fungal diversity by revealing novel phylotypes from both terrestrial and aquatic habitats. Available online 23 November 2016 Here, I used ion semiconductor sequencing (Ion Torrent) of the ribosomal large subunit (LSU/28S) to Corresponding Editor: Felix Barlocher€ explore fungal diversity from water and sediment samples collected from four habitats in coastal North Carolina. The dominant taxa observed were Ascomycota and Chytridiomycota, though all fungal phyla Keywords: were represented. Diversity was highest in sand flats and wetland sediments, though benthic sediments Marine fungi harbored the highest proportion of novel sequences. Most sequences assigned to early-diverging fungal Ion torrent groups could not be assigned
    [Show full text]
  • The Nature of Naming What’S in a Name?
    The Nature of Naming What’s in a Name? • "A rose is a rose," it has been said • And most of us know a rose when we see one • As we know the African marigolds • Maples, elms, cedars, and pines that shade our backyards and line our streets What’s in a Name? • We usually call these plants by their common names • But if we wanted to know more about the cedar tree in our front yard, we would find that "cedar" may refer to: – Eastern red cedar What’s in a Name? • Incense cedar What’s in a Name? • Western red cedar What’s in a Name? • Atlantic white cedar What’s in a Name? • Spanish cedar What’s in a Name? • Biblical Lebanon cedar What’s in a Name? • In fact, we would find that cedars are found in three separate plant families What’s in a Name? • Later, after discovering that our "African" marigolds are in fact from Mexico and our "Spanish" cedar originated in the West Indies, we would realize how misleading the common names of plants can be. What’s in a Name? • The same plant can have many different common names – European white lily has at least 245 – Marsh marigold has at least 280 What’s in a Name? • Clearly, if we use only the common name of a plant, we cannot be sure of understanding very much about that plant Classification • It is for this reason that the scientific community prefers to use a more precise way of naming, or classification • Scientific classification, however, is more than just naming: it is a key to understanding • Botanists name a plant to give it a unique place in the biological world, as well as to clarify its relationships within that world How Are Plants Classified? • Science classifies living things in an orderly system through which they can be easily identified – Categories of increasing size, based upon relationships within those categories How Are Plants Classified? • For example, all plants can be put in order from the more primitive to the more advanced.
    [Show full text]
  • The Empire of Life Needs a Proper Name by Guy Lane & Andrew Buckwell
    The Empire of Life Needs a Proper Name by Guy Lane & Andrew Buckwell The Empire of Life Needs a Proper Name 9 May, 2020. The biggest living organism on Planet Earth is the Living Planet itself, but she doesn’t have a proper name. Guy Lane & Andrew Buckwell ascribe a taxonomic classification to Gaia. THE PROCESS of human reproduction goes through a number of distinct phases. First, a young man meets a young woman and they learn each other’s names. They realise their lives would be better in a partnership. They come to an agreement about how to live together, and then they make a baby human. A similar process takes place when our Living Planet seeks to reproduce. Let us explain. The proper name for a human is Homo sapiens, and the science of properly naming living things is called taxonomy. In 1758, Carl Linneus instituted the practice of binomial nomenclature. This is a two-part name, written in Latin that describes how the organism looks or behaves. The binomial for Homo sapiens translates (perhaps inappropriately) to “wise people”. All species are so named as part of their ‘taxonomic rank’ that has a number of levels: Domain – Kingdom – Phylum – Class – Order – Family – Genus – Species. For a human, the taxonomic rank has the following entries: Prokaryote – Animalia – Chordata – Mammalia – Primate – Hominidae – Homo – Sapiens. The different types of living things can be represented in a Tree of Life. The picture below shows the Tree of Life extended to the level of Kingdom. 1 The Empire of Life Needs a Proper Name by Guy Lane & Andrew Buckwell The Phylogenetic tree (Image via Wikipedia) Of note, there is one important life form that has yet to be given a binomial or ascribed a taxonomic rank.
    [Show full text]
  • Historical Review of Systematic Biology and Nomenclature - Alessandro Minelli
    BIOLOGICAL SCIENCE FUNDAMENTALS AND SYSTEMATICS – Vol. II - Historical Review of Systematic Biology and Nomenclature - Alessandro Minelli HISTORICAL REVIEW OF SYSTEMATIC BIOLOGY AND NOMENCLATURE Alessandro Minelli Department of Biology, Via U. Bassi 58B, I-35131, Padova,Italy Keywords: Aristotle, Belon, Cesalpino, Ray, Linnaeus, Owen, Lamarck, Darwin, von Baer, Haeckel, Sokal, Sneath, Hennig, Mayr, Simpson, species, taxa, phylogeny, phenetic school, phylogenetic school, cladistics, evolutionary school, nomenclature, natural history museums. Contents 1. The Origins 2. From Classical Antiquity to the Renaissance Encyclopedias 3. From the First Monographers to Linnaeus 4. Concepts and Definitions: Species, Homology, Analogy 5. The Impact of Evolutionary Theory 6. The Last Few Decades 7. Nomenclature 8. Natural History Collections Glossary Bibliography Biographical Sketch Summary The oldest roots of biological systematics are found in folk taxonomies, which are nearly universally developed by humankind to cope with the diversity of the living world. The logical background to the first modern attempts to rationalize the classifications was provided by Aristotle's logic, as embodied in Cesalpino's 16th century classification of plants. Major advances were provided in the following century by Ray, who paved the way for the work of Linnaeus, the author of standard treatises still regarded as the starting point of modern classification and nomenclature. Important conceptual progress was due to the French comparative anatomists of the early 19th century UNESCO(Cuvier, Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire) – andEOLSS to the first work in comparative embryology of von Baer. Biological systematics, however, was still searching for a unifying principle that could provide the foundation for a natural, rather than conventional, classification.SAMPLE This principle wasCHAPTERS provided by evolutionary theory: its effects on classification are already present in Lamarck, but their full deployment only happened in the 20th century.
    [Show full text]
  • Guide to Plant Collection and Identification
    GUIDE TO PLANT COLLECTION AND IDENTIFICATION by Jane M. Bowles PhD Originally prepared for a workshop in Plant Identification for the Ministry of Natural Resources in 1982. Edited and revised for the UWO Herbarium Workshop in Plant Collection and Identification, 2004 © Jane M. Bowles, 2004 -0- CHAPTER 1 THE NAMES OF PLANTS The history of plant nomenclature: Humans have always had a need to classify objects in the world about them. It is the only means they have of acquiring and passing on knowledge. The need to recognize and describe plants has always been especially important because of their use for food and medicinal purposes. The commonest, showiest or most useful plants were given common names, but usually these names varied from country to country and often from district to district. Scholars and herbalists knew the plants by a long, descriptive, Latin sentence. For example Cladonia rangiferina, the common "Reindeer Moss", was described as Muscus coralloides perforatum (The perforated, coral-like moss). Not only was this system unwieldy, but it too varied from user to user and with the use of the plant. In the late 16th century, Casper Bauhin devised a system of using just two names for each plant, but it was not universally adopted until the Swedish naturalist, Carl Linnaeus (1707-1778) set about methodically classifying and naming the whole of the natural world. The names of plants: In 1753, Linnaeus published his "Species Plantarum". The modern names of nearly all plants date from this work or obey the conventions laid down in it. The scientific name for an organism consists of two words: i) the genus or generic name, ii) the specific epithet.
    [Show full text]
  • An Illustrated Key to the Ferns of Oregon
    AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF Helen Patricia O'Donahue Pembrook for the Master of Arts (Name) (Degree) Systematic Botany (Major) Date thesis is presented March 8, 1963 Title AN ILLUSTRATED KEY TO THE FERNS OF OREGON Abstract approved IIIII (Major professor) The purpose of the work is to enable students of botany to identify accurately Oregon ferns, both as living plants and as dried speci- mens. Therefore, it provides vegetative keys to the families, genera and species of the ferns (Class FILICINAE) found in Oregon. Correct names have been determined using the latest available information and in accordance with 1961 edition of the International Code of Botan- ical Nomenclature. The synonomy, a description, and original draw- ings of each species and subspecific taxon are included. An illustrated glossary and a technical glossary have been prepared to explain and clarify the descriptive terms used. There is also a bibliography of the literature used in the preparation of the paper. The class FILICINAE is represented in Oregon by 4 families, 20 genera, 45 or 46 species, 4 of which are represented by more than one subspecies or variety. One species, Botrychium pumicola Coville, is endemic. The taxa are distributed as follows: OPHIO- GLOSSACEAE, 2 genera: Botrychium, 7 species, 1 represented by 2 subspecies, 1 by 2 varieties; Ophioglossum, 1 species. POLYPODI- ACEAE, 15 genera: Woodsia., 2 species; Cystopteris, 1 species; Dryopteris, 6 species; Polystichum, 5 species, 1 represented by 2 distinct varieties; Athyrium, 2 species; Asplenium, 2 species; Stru- thiopteris, 1 species; Woodwardia, 1 species; Pitrogramma, 1 spe- cies; Pellaea, 4 species; Cheilanthes, 3 or 4 species; Cryptogramma, 1 species; Adiantum, 2 species; Pteridium, 1 species; Polypodium, 2 species, 1 represented by 2 varieties.
    [Show full text]
  • Why Do Plant Names Change?
    Plant names in chaos, as everyone could then Making decisions choose names as they wish. If taxonomic changes are simply Taxonomic decisions are more recommendations, who chooses contentious. The role of taxonomy is what to follow? For the RHS, the to classify organisms into different task falls to the Nomenclature and groups. These groups (correctly ‘taxa’ Taxonomy Advisory Group (NATAG), or singular ‘taxon’) include family, comprised of plantspeople interested genus, species, subspecies, variety in horticultural plants, all under­ and cultivar. Botanists constantly stand ing how the Codes work in update their views on how to classify both botanical and horticultural plants. In the past this was mostly worlds, as well as a broad familiarity Despite the inconvenience, based upon visible characteristics, with garden plants. By bringing but genetic work has added new people together there is usually there are important scientific evidence. As a result botanists have someone familiar with the plants reasons behind plant name been reclassifying plants to reflect discussed. The advisory group also changes and some of these will recently revealed evolutionary has a network of outside experts relationships: that is, those plants on which it can call, and welcomes Why do plant eventually benefit gardeners more closely related to each other contributions from anyone who has Author: Christopher Whitehouse, G than originally thought are now an opinion on what name should be AP Keeper of the RHS Herbarium at Wisley JO / placed in the same group. This should used. Decisions made by the advisory and secretary to the RHS Nomenclature H N GLOVE N lead to future stability, but at present group are reflected in the latest and Taxonomy Advisory Group names change? we are in a period of change.
    [Show full text]
  • The Future of the Taxonomy of Cultivated Plants
    The Future of the Taxonomy of Cultivated Plants K. van Ettekoven Naktuinbouw P.O. Box 40 Sotaweg 22 2370 AA Roelofarendsveen The Netherlands Keywords: cultivars, cultonomy, national listing, nomenclature, statutory registration, UPOV Abstract In agriculture and horticulture, at least 80% of taxonomic problems are related to the cultivar. In particular, questions such as (a) “Am I really dealing with a new cultivar?” (b) “To which species does a cultivar belong?” (c) “How can I recognize a cultivar phenotypically, especially if it is a hybrid?” and (d) “Does the cultivar-group system always work?” continually impact on the work of those dealing with the classification and naming of cultivated plant material. Further questions dealing with the very nature of cultivars and whether wild forms or other categories named under the provisions of the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature (ICBN) should be eligible for cultivar status form an ongoing debate, as do a range of other issues such as the nomenclatural treatment of mixtures as cultivars in the agricultural industry. Statutory registration systems are based on DUS (Distinction, Uniformity, and Stability). The denominations provided through these systems have historically been made with minimal reference to the International Code of Nomenclature for Cultivated Plants (ICNCP). Stability in naming is the first priority for those trading in, and legislating for, cultivars in the market place. Clearly there is a need to provide an international forum for discussion and resolution of these and other related problems so that the interests of plant breeders, collection mangers, plant traders, taxonomists, and legislators may be discussed and resolved in a decisive way through a platform that carries international recognition.
    [Show full text]
  • Common Ground and Differences Between Spirulina and Chlorella Spirulina
    Common ground and differences between Spirulina and Chlorella Spirulina: Spirulina platensis microalgae belong to the most pre- cious alkaline natural substances of our time. In a concentrated natural form they provide more than Attributes Chlorella pyrenoidosa Spirulina platensis 50 vital substances for human beings and animals. In all eras they have been used as a supplement food, e. g. in Botanical name • Chlorella pyrenoidosa • Spirulina platensis previous ancient cultures of the Maya and Aztec. Species • green algae (Chlorophyta) • blue algae (Cyanobacteria) Conditions of growth • in fresh-water • in very alkaline soda-water • estimated age: approx. 3.1 billion years (pH-value 9 - 11) • natural sources: shallow, mineral rich lakes, in Microscopic pictures tropical or subtropical climes, e.g. Africa, South- America India, China, Taiwan, Japan • global use: as food and in food, as a food supplement, as animal feed, especially for ornamental fish, birds, and small animals, as a cosmetic agent Cell form characteristic • Protozoa, round • Protozoa in a thread-shaped compound, spiral Cell wall • cellulose with sporopollenin, of which it is • easily digestible polysaccharides, which said to have a heavy metal binding takes care of good digestibility and Chlorella: quality a good bioavailability of all vital substances Cell nucleus • with cell nucleus • no cell nucleus, free spiral DNA Chlorella probably has the highest chlorophyll content in the plant kingdom. From there it gets its neme which means „little greenness“. Nutrient characteristics • rich in nutrients, with over 50 vital substan- • rich in nutrients with over 50 vital substances Chlorophyll is an important oxidant carrier and is also cal- ces and all 8 essential amino acids and all 8 essential amino acids led „treasured up sunlight“.
    [Show full text]