Neo' name change ???

[Roy]

To add to the disussion, take as a good examples of too many cooks or false testing.
Laelia to Sophronitis, now Cattleya purpurata or tenebrosa.
How many corrections in the stud book did this mess take???

[Bud]

I was wondering why the other plants and trees; even animals dont change names....only Orchids??!!??
Is it because people have to pay a filing fee to register the names of their orchids? There is money involved....
It is a big bussiness....this naming of orchids

[isurus79]

Originally Posted by Bud

I was wondering why the other plants and trees; even animals dont change names....only Orchids??!!??
Is it because people have to pay a filing fee to register the names of their orchids? There is money involved....
It is a big bussiness....this naming of orchids

Na, name changes happen all the time. I'm taking a Native Plants class here in Texas and we had to go through our whole field guide and make taxonomic corrections by hand. Its just that science is changing and the names need to keep up.

[lepetitmartien]

Names and classification change for animals too, good examples are panda or platypus. Even bacterias, fungi change of name, it happened to the ones attacking orchids.

Taxonomy is a very difficult science, when you work with mammals it's most of the time easy. The more you go away in the tree of evolution, the worst it can get.

[DavidCampen]

Originally Posted by Bud

I was wondering why the other plants and trees; even animals dont change names....only Orchids??!!??
Is it because people have to pay a filing fee to register the names of their orchids? There is money involved....
It is a big bussiness....this naming of orchids

Yeah, I wish I had gone to school to become an orchid taxonomist so that I could make big money too. LOL.

[goodgollymissmolly]

Originally Posted by Bud

People romanticize these charlattans at KEWS or RHS as scientists....
Doctors, Nurses, Engineers, Architects and Lawyers have to undergo examinations and licensed by the Bar or the Board before they are allowed to work....
these RHS or KEWS people is highly dubious that they even finished college or seen a lab....they are merely appointed by the Royals....they have to have connections to be in power much less be rich ... because there is no salary involved at all....yet they get to name orchids without being properly credentialed....
The best Botanists and scientists of the land will go to work for the high paying lab or do research where there is grants and money involved...so I doubt if these RHS people are credible real scientists by the mistakes they made through the decades....even a mere student of Botany will make sure they submit a paper with no mistakes or else they will be scrutinized by their peers and proffessors....so why are the RHS and KEWS people blatantly make these mistakes??!!! its because no one is holding them responsible for what they are doing....

*and it is very clear to me that they do not know what they are doing

You think you might be a little over the line?

[Magnus A]

Originally Posted by Bud

People romanticize these charlattans at KEWS or RHS as scientists....
Doctors, Nurses, Engineers, Architects and Lawyers have to undergo examinations and licensed by the Bar or the Board before they are allowed to work....
these RHS or KEWS people is highly dubious that they even finished college or seen a lab....they are merely appointed by the Royals....they have to have connections to be in power much less be rich ... because there is no salary involved at all....yet they get to name orchids without being properly credentialed....
The best Botanists and scientists of the land will go to work for the high paying lab or do research where there is grants and money involved...so I doubt if these RHS people are credible real scientists by the mistakes they made through the decades....even a mere student of Botany will make sure they submit a paper with no mistakes or else they will be scrutinized by their peers and proffessors....so why are the RHS and KEWS people blatantly make these mistakes??!!! its because no one is holding them responsible for what they are doing....

*and it is very clear to me that they do not know what they are doing

Sorry to say but you have obviously no idéa about the reputation KEW have within the scientific community, or understanding of what KEW is! There IS a clear difference between RHS and KEW and that I have posted above.
KEW: Botany
RHS: Horticulture

By your post it is also clear that you have no idéa of what peer-review published science is. Stating that "a mere student of Botany will make sure they submit a paper with no mistakes or else they will be scrutinized by their peers and proffessors" show that you have no clue to the amount of errors in the peer-review journals out there!
Even the most renown professors in all field have publications with errors.

[Magnus A]

Originally Posted by isurus79

Wow, check out how many names Neo. falcata has had!!
Vanda falcata (Thunb.) Beer (1854: 317).
Basionym:
Orchis falcata Thunberg (1784: 811).
Homotypic synonyms:
Limodorum falcatum (Thunb.) Thunberg (1794: 326).
Angraecum falcatum (Thunb.) Lindley (1821: t15).
Oeceoclades falcata (Thunb.) Lindley (1833: 237).
Aerides thunbergii Miquel (1866: 205).
Angorchis falcata (Thunb.) Kuntze (1891a: 651).
Angraecopsis falcata (Thunb.) Schlechter (1914: 601).
Finetia falcata (Thunb.) Schlechter (1918: 140).
Neofinetia falcata (Thunb.) Hu (1925: 107).
Nipponorchis falcata (Thunb.) Masamune (1934: 592).
Holcoglossum falcatum (Thunb.) Garay & H.R.Sweet (1972: 182).
Heterotypic synonyms:
Oeceoclades lindleyi von Regel (1866: 70).
Distribution:—China, Japan, Korea, Nansei-Shoto (Ryukyu) Islands.
Notes:—Vanda falcata was proposed in 1854 by Beer in Prakt. Stud. Orchid. before being placed in
Neofinetia in 1925

The paper doesn't say, but are these name changes based on new genetic studies?

So Nefinetia falcata was created in 1925 as a new genus, due to the latest studies at that time.

Why should that change be accepted and not the latest and most resent knowledge of the plant?
IF it was the first person that described the species that should name it we should go back to Thunberg´s Oechis falcata from 1784!

[Magnus A]

Species naming has a meaning, and as the horticulture community (RHS and for that matter AOS) desperately wish to have scientific recognition they have decided to follow the botanical naming of species for their awarding programs. You that are members of the RHS and AOS and feel the naming of orchids within these organisation should not be connected to the Scientific names of Botany, start working within the organisations. IT is the members that dictates the regulations an organisation should work after....

[lepetitmartien]

And it's not to hobbyist to ponder the data and make an argumented choice for taxonomy issues. There are taxonomists out there, and no, DavidCampen, it's not a good career choice if you're after money…

Taxonomy and most related sciences like entomology or botany (just to point 2) is an under funded science, highly specialized and necessary to all the others from paleontology to applied genetics.

You can study something you can't name. And sometimes, the more you study, the more you find the classification inadequate. Science learns, change, evolve, and along the way, sometimes, the science around something is secure, most of the time it's not but they get along, care and correct.