Quote:
Originally Posted by alecStewart1
Ah okay. That makes sense.
And Vandachostylis is intergeneric because Rhynchostylis is not technically in the Vanda genera?
|
I think that Rhynchostylis is still considered a separate genus. This week, anyway... Clearly these species are closely related enough to breed. The decisions on where to draw the lines between genera based on their DNA (and their "relatedness" ) gets down into the scientific weeds. There have been many changes in the last few years. As new information is determined, the science has to follow. It drives us in the horticultural world crazy, but it is fundamental in science to follow the data - which evolves as new analytical technology develops.
Neither "genus" nor "species" are inherent characteristics of an organism. Nature is messy, and these (and other taxonomic parameters) are human attempts to describe relationships. Even at the species level, there is natural variation between individuals. When do those "varieties" become separate enough to become separate species? Example at the species level would be Miltonia spactabiis var. moreliana. It is now considered to be a distinct species, Miltonia moreliana. You will see the plants labeled both ways... few people change their tags when the accepted scientific labels change.
To look up a species, the database of names kept by
Kew Gardens in the UK is the authority that AOS follows. It lists (sometimes) as synonyms other names that a species may have been known by. But there are other scientific publications that still may differ.
IOSPE attempts to keep up with the various references where nomenclature is published.
Threaded Mode
