Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteRabbit
Nice!
|
Thank You, Sonya !
---------- Post added at 01:03 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:58 AM ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew
It's an issue with how the taxonomists are interpreting the DNA evidence. Both the 'lumpers' and the 'splitters' agree that Dendrobium relatives like Cadetia, Flickingeria, Diplocaulobium etc have evolved as specialised lines within Dendrobium sensu lato. A group in Australia has argued to keep Cadetia etc and split Dendrobium up into lots of smaller genera on the basis that it's not scientific to maintain huge genera like Dendrobium whilst at the same time allowing other more closely related taxa to be split off into separate genera. Those arguing to keep Dendrobium intact based on the ICBN rules regarding conserving names and avoiding unnecessary splitting, which includes Kew, have accepted that they have to put Cadetia etc back into Dendrobium in order to keep Dendrobium monophyletic.
|
That is good to know, but I still do not like Botanists who are humans that keep committing mistakes that keep on changing names and classifications....in another half century they will reclassify orchids again and rename orchids again because the head honcho of RHS found a reason to just rename orchids....just for kicks.....that is why I do not have respect for RHS and KEW=they are supposed to be top scientists of the world and they still do not get things right as simple as naming an orchid....and growers pay RHS to register the orchids they did a hybrid on. RHS have the monopoly on registering orchids and RHS do not have any competition so RHS feel they can do just about anything without any repercussion nor anyone monitoring their actions.
---------- Post added at 01:10 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:03 AM ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orchids4ever
This is a very nice one, Bud.
|
Thank You, Monika!
Threaded Mode
