“The database, accessible at The Plant List, identifies 1.25 million names for plants, ranging from essential food crops such as wheat, rice and corn to garden roses and exotic jungle ferns, and provides links to published research.”
See the article at
http://news.discovery.com/earth/plant-database-library-101229.html
I can’t help thinking this is going to make things worse before it makes them better. Here’s the data for the genus Rosa:
I still use ICPN. Its not great but its mildly useful. I agree with you re: the above.
I’d never stay in a closed room with two botanists.
Understanding synonymy can be really important for the plant physiologist or agronomist. I’ve seen some reaallly embarrassed people barking up the wrong tree so to speak. For instance what do you make of the name “cornflowers?”, or “broccoli raab?” or “sand pear?”. Sometimes the same name gets applied to really different things, as with so many tropical woods or even She oak and other eucalypts.
So they are doing us the favor of letting us know how bad it is out there. The trick now is for someone to check out the posted names and resolve the unresolved. Professor Lewis, where are you?
Correct, which is why I would not want to be in the crossfire when it got down to the details. And, ultimately, despite the objectivity, there is a tinge of subjectivity in terms of “Who gets the final say and why?” So ego comes into play eventually, which is when it gets dirty.
The second species I looked for, R. clinophylla, is absent. That makes me wonder about its usefulness.
Expand your thought further, Paul? ie. What are you implying?
Well, that means it is incomplete, no?
Ah, good point.
Doesn’t have lyellii or tunquinensis either.