Is Taxonomy Too Taxing?

Do you have a problem with botanical names for industrial plant ? Are you intimidated by the Latin ? Maybe you agree with Shakespeare when he said :

‘ What ’ s in a name ? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet’ . Romeo and Juliet .

It is dependable it would smell just as perfumed but we wouldn ’ t be able to talk about it would we , if there was no name that we could all agree on ? It would make blogging pointless .

Silybum marianum

Since Theophrastus man has been attempting to classify flora and put them into groups according to what they looked like . The scientific language for this was always Latin . Until Linneus come along plant names were getting longsighted and more gawky .

Linneus created hisSystema Naturaewhich was a groundbreaking attack to classify living organisms in a scientific way . InFundamenta Botanicahe laid out his sexual system of classification and it outraged citizenry because he classified plants according to their procreative electric organ . He number the stamens and pistil and his description were deliberately provocative and caused scandalisation . you’re able to imagine how a verbal description like this went down . ‘ Therefore the Calyx is the bedroom , the Corolla is thecurtain , the filament are the spermatic vessel , the Anthers are the testicle , the Pollenis the spermatozoan , the Stigma is the vulva , the Style is the vagina … ’Oh dear . An stake in prime had always been considered nice for ladies and now here it was turn into porno . Most masses refused to accept that plant life behaved like that .

Binominal terminology .

Silybum marianum

What we really have to give thanks Linneus for is the system we have now , which is hollo Binominal nomenclature . It is a very in force system which intend that plant have two name , the first is the genus which is a bit like a surname . The next is phone the specific epithet and is a descriptive word . The genus ( plural form genus ) is always written with a Das Kapital missive and the specific name never is , even if it commemorates a name . Both tidings are spell in italics . The name of the cultivar is in inverted commas and it is not italicise . Acer rubrum‘October Glory ’ .

I don ’ t understand why people have such a resistance to mastering the correct botanical name for plant . Is it because it is weigh elitist , or depict off to know the right name ? Is it a veneration of Latin ? True , Latin is not taught so much in schools now , but my Latin ‘ O ’ floor study of Virgil isn ’ t much help in memorize botanic epithet . It does take a little spare crusade to learn them but it is deserving it . If you recognize the right name for a industrial plant , it is outside and you may discourse plant with anyone in the world who is interested in plant . How awe-inspiring to have an international language .

The other great advantage of the binominal system is that the specific epithet often tells you something about the industrial plant . It may separate you the semblance . For model : coccinea= red , lutea= yellow etc . It may describe the leaves or the petal or the form of the plant . E.G.foetida= stinky , horridus= bristly , ( not horrid ) . It may tell you where the plant grows and that is useful to know . For instance;palustris= marshy , arvensis= in the W. C. Fields .

Silybum marianum

Silybum marianum

possibly the specific epithet recount you where the plant comes from . But you have to be careful here . squill peruvianacomes from the Mediterranean , not Peru . The name of the ship that make for it to the UK was called The Peru . Sometimes the name commemorates the name of the person who find it , or the artificer figure it in someone else ’s honor . It is consider bad form to name a plant life after yourself .

There is a great short book which is very helpful when you are trying to learn Latin names . Plant Names Simplified . Their Pronunciation Derivation and Meaningby A T Johnson and H. A. Smith . I love this volume and pertain to it all the time . plainly if you never learnt Latin it is a bit of a challenge coming to grips with the fact that noun can be masculine , feminine or neuter and the ending of the specific name must agree with the genus . We used to be capable to buy a flora calledPolygonum bistorta‘Superbum ’ , and what a delight to those of us with a infantile sentience of witticism to have a plant life with a super bum . The name of the genus was changed toPersicariaand so unfortunately the plant becamePersicaria bistorta‘Superba ’ . What a pathos , it has nothing to do with fundament at all . But never fear we still have a silly hind end . For the time being at least .

Silybum marianum

Caltha palustris

Caltha palustris

Last week Christina atMyhesperidesgardenandWellywomandiscussed the problem of constantly changing plant names and what we should do about it . Christina suggest that we should have a debate . Do we give up on the Latin and use common name calling for plants ? Do we just ignore changes and bewilder with the name we have learnt so painstakingly ? After all they are called synonyms . Unfortunately in botanical term a synonym is not exchangeable with the current right name .

have ’ s look at common name first . But how coarse are they ? Where I farm up the local name forCaltha palustriswas May Blobs . When I issue forth to live in Suffolk nobody know what I was talking about if I name May Blobs . You may call the flower Marsh Marigold or King Cups . Or you may call it something else because there are 31 different local names for the industrial plant . So really , middling as it may be , a vernacular name is useless for discussing plant .

Caltha palustris

I have noticed that American bloggers are very stabbing on vernacular names for flower and I have to say that if they don ’ t give the Romance name too , I have no idea what they are talking about and I put on ’ t suppose anyone in the UK does . The names may be pretty but they are unknown here and I don ’ t want to knock off mastermind space on take them . We have a perfectly practiced botanic name for them which everyone understands . The causa is made worse by the fact that there are many , many so- called lily which aren ’ MT lilies at all . And what about wild hyacinth and black - eyed susies ? There are quite a few totally unrelated plant masquerade under these names . Some nurseries add to the confusion by make up nice sound name for plants which they conceive will trade best if they put on ’ t have those horrid Latin names to put people off . I really believe that if you are concerned enough in plants to publish a blog you should be nerdy enough to learn to use the grown up names so that we all know what you are blab out about . After all nobody findsRhododendron , Penstemon , Forsythiadifficult . People use the nameGeraniumquite happily ( and very often blithely ignoring the fact that this word hasn ’ deoxythymidine monophosphate been used to line thePelargoniumsince 1738 . ) Probably the same hoi polloi importune on calling theHippeastrumanAmaryllis . Still at least they are using the Latin . Let ’s just have a flying look at the difference between these constantly confused flora .

But I guess the real trouble in confusion in plant names is the ever increasing turn of plants which are being reclassify . It is fatigue for us all , expensive for nurseries and quickly frame book out of date .

There is an International Code of Botanical Nomenclature and there are ruler which is a dependable thing because it does help to avoid confusion . For instance no plant is allowed more than one name . If in the past more than one name has been delegate to a plant then the first name is the right one . Another formula which I think is a bit of a spoilsport is that tautology ( tautonyms ) is not allow . In zoological science ‘ Bufa bufa’is a toad . The correct name for a Gorilla gorilla is ‘ Gorilla gorilla ’ . The one I especially wish is the former name for the European Chaffinch which wasChloris chloris . Sadly this has now been alter toCarduelischloris . None of these tautonyms are tolerate in the works world . The nearest wasZiziphuszizyphus ( a sort of date ) which wasn ’ t quite a tautonym but even this was changed toZiziphus jujuba . We still do haveSalacca zalacathough which is a form of palm . Perhaps nobody has noticed that it is almost a tautology .

The most common reason for plant being reclassified is the fact that we now have DNA testing which reveals the family relationship between plant far more expeditiously than just looking at them ever did . The raw model is called cladistics . Basically this means that there is only one line of descent of parentage for every specie and you could not have two coinage in the same genus which are not related . Of of course this has lead to a not bad shake up of the plant mankind and a lot of reorganisation . It is inauspicious , but it is inevitable really . It is not the effect of sudden capricious whims of taxonomists , it is really necessary to sort things out in the light of young understanding . For example the huge house ofAsterhas been rive up because it was discovered that American asters were not related in any room to the ones elsewhere in the world . TheChrysanthemumfamily was split up but garden grower were allowed to keep the name for their showy perennials .

When it was discovered that Australian wattles were not related to ace anywhere else in the world they were allowed to keep the nameAcaciaand the ones in other parts of the world had to change .

Of naturally there is often disagreement in the way that works are classify . Taxonomists are divided between the ‘ lumpers ’ and the ‘ splitters ’ . But this has been the case since the time of Darwin . The most thwarting thing is when a plant is changed as whenVeronicabecame aHebein the 1929 and then after DNA analysis it recently became aVeronicaagain .

It is difficult for us to keep up because these changes have traditionally only been reported in peer- reexamine scientific journals which we belike don ’ t have approach to . thing have changed though because new plant no longer have to be described in Latin and they can be published on crease .

I retrieve as bloggers we have the swell vantage that we can keep each other up to date and indeed this is what we do . We talk about plants and with much grumbling we take on board the new epithet . I have get word aboutSymphiotrichumfrom fellow blogger this year and I am sure as more plants get reassigned we will manage to keep abreast . Let ’ s look upon it as a challenge .

Here are a couple more plant with raw names that I am gradually arrive to grips with . The lovelyCimicifuga simplex‘Atropurpurea ’ has becomeActaea simplex‘Atropurpurea ’ . The estimable news is that when the genus interchange the name unremarkably keep its specific epithet .

Actaea simplex ‘ Atropurpurea ’

The tall Sedums have been renamedHylotelphiumafter a cogitation at Tokyo University realize that they should not be class in the same family as creeping stonecrops . Hang on though , I guess this change is still being thrashed out .

Hylotelephium

Actaea simplex ‘Atropurpurea’

Actaea simplex ‘Atropurpurea’

I will land up with a poem that I like by Robert Frost . I have noticed that the bottom of my garden which has been an orchard for hundreds of years is riddle with honey fungus , Armillaria mellea . The apple and plum tree trees are specially vulnerable but so are roses . amazingly they all belong to theRosacaefamily .

The Rose Family .

The rose is a roseAnd was always a roseBut now the theory goesThat the apple ’ s a roseAnd the pear is and so ’ sThe plum tree I suppose . Dear only knowsWhat will next prove a roseYou of course are a rose … But were always a rose . Robert Frost .

Hylotelephium

Hylotelephium

I would get it on to hear your opinion about industrial plant taxonomy , please join in with the disputation . I see thatChristinahas posted about this field today I am going over to see what she has to say now . Please have a facial expression and see out forWellywoman’scontribution . And do link up in . This concerns us all .

77 Responses toIs Taxonomy Too Taxing?

Yes , have ’s have more Latin ! In cattiness of one of my neighbor ridiculing me when I mention Latin names , at least we all know what we are talking about . People from different countries using Latin can understand each other , as when our Word ’s Mother in Law from Moldova came to visit . Her English was n’t good then , but we could still talk garden because we fuck the names of plants in Latin . It take me a time to get used to new name changes , but I get there eventually .

I agree with you that Latin names are necessary for communicating what plant on the button you are talking about . I endeavor to use them in my own web log , if I can commend them . I prefer Latin over common name . And I think it ’s nerveless that they are using DNA analysis to reckon out how plant are in fact bear on , or not . But it does get pesky to have to find out fresh ones , my aging wit ca n’t take it , so I reserve the right to moan about it . I did n’t learn Latin in schooling , but I do n’t worry about orthoepy ( much ) . If I ’m not sure , I pronounce it several way and the listener can take their pick . I must have the same adolescent sense of sense of humor that you have , because I giggled over ‘ Superbum ’ too . I latterly learn an article that said they have start doing the same desoxyribonucleic acid analysis on fowl , and have attain connections they did n’t realize , for exemplar , that flamingos are link up to pigeons . So now I wonder if they will start rename them .

Really great Charles William Post , Chloris ! … I have PDF’d it to share with others when postulate ( okay ? ) . I do desire this debate continues . As I ’m formally a plant scientist ( have a degree ) , I used just scientific ( Latin ) name for a retentive time , but could see it was a losing engagement in sure arenas . In management and conservation , especially of public lands ( USA ) , Latin can seem so off - putt , pedantic , snobbish , etc . AND we ’re trying to persuade hoi polloi that plant and vegetation are important . So common names are important . The US government is seek to standardise plant uncouth figure ( search on USDA PLANTS database ) , which sometimes results in comical - to - us names for our intimate industrial plant . So even here we have to be careful and use regional vulgar names in talking with folks .

Ah epithet – a necessary evil , rather like indoor plumbery 😉

I was thinking as I read your presentation that if we used Linnaeus ’s approach – denote to imbed vaginas and testicles – perhaps more educatee would sign up for Plant Taxonomy !

It is right that works are properly classified , now that we have the engineering to do so , and I opine we will have to put up with the pain in the ass while it is pass on . The Linnaean system makes everlasting sense to me , even if I do sputter to remember all the names . Especially when the squirrel make off with the labels .

Well I am one of those exasperating American bloggers who utilize wanted few Latin terms … in all probability because Latin was not taught ( shame on our ed organization ) . You must crawl Chloris when you read my Wiley Post . And as others of us have said American nurseryman generally learn the common names and have to back into learning the Latin which I have still not done . I do sample to provide more Latin public figure in post . But like Julie , I adore the unwashed names and find them captivating as it go with the folklore .

I do read why it is important to use a usual speech , but Americans are fond to our adaptation of English … we do need to get over that and become bilingual or multilingual or at least in my case botanical lingual . I do feel like a dope as I do use the words geranium for both plants ( and I know the deviation ) and of course vender here use amaryllis … but I promise to get better….is there a Rosetta Stone class for botanical names ? I could utilize it …

I entirely agree with you Chloris , but with old grumps like me who , for instance , have known Campanula muralis and have had to learn to call it Campanula portenschlagiana , the learning curve can be frustrating . Somehow , muralis was so simple and even descriptive . I am sure you know what I mean .

While I joked that I was tempt to give up proper botanic names for mutual names in a comment to Christina , I actually opt the use of proper names for clearness ’s sake myself , although I will often tot up public figure used in common idiom in the US in parentheses to help readers with the recognition . Jane is proper that common public figure vary over distance and , the greater the length , the more illogical they get . For exemplar , I remember laugh when I come across that Solierolia soleirolii , know as “ baby ’s crying ” here , is call “ mind - your - own business ” in the UK – how could we ever align those 2 references without the Romance name ? Keeping up with the changes is the great struggle , particularly when nurseries and botanic guides often use outdated terms . I usually hear of name changes through the blogging community but the source providing the update is seldom identified , making verification difficult , peculiarly when there are so many contradictory references on - line . I learn Jane ’s note on The Plant List dot org and have add that to my world-wide reference list as my go - to source for the most current selective information available .

What a groovy treatment , Chloris . I incur it interesting that my questionable retention sometimes has more trouble remembering the usual name and sometimes the Latin name , calculate upon the plant . No idea why that is . I wholly gibe that the Romance language is desirable , and I find it comforting that in this various , wide universe gardener can talk the same language even if it is n’t their native clapper ( and fascinating that it ’s an otherwise “ dead ” language – what a wonderful use for it ) . I acquire basic Latin in primary school . I do n’t commemorate much of it ( or of my French ) , but I guess being exposed to it has help me a fleck with plant names . The most difficult thing for me is , as you say the fact that flora names are change quite a flake recently with the DNA research . Once the names are set , it will be much easier . I do need to practice with my Latin works names . With that say , that ’s one reason I ’m a blogger and not a botanist . I would have trouble remembering them all on the fly ball ! Great post !

I very much enjoyed this post , Chloris and agree with you wholeheartedly even though I ’m guilty of calling Hippeastrum Amaryllis . I did n’t realize that DNA testing was the reason for so many variety in taxonomy . This makes perfect sense . We do wish to cling to the names we learn and really , once one ’s practiced something like Ranunculus constantinopolitanus enough times for it to trip off his / her tongue to the amazement of garden visitor , it ’s difficult to abandon . To have a conversation about a industrial plant , the proper binomial nomenclature is essential ! Having approached Latin from a choral perspective , it was a bit difficult to deflect the rules of pronunciation a bit for some botanical name . Fortunately , gardener are very exonerative if you assay their spoken language . Now the internet will pronounce plant life names for us ! Beatus hortorum cultus amici mei ( felicitous garden my ally ! )

Is Taxonomy Too Taxing?