Dear Feedback,
The recent article in Porcupine! (17: 7) by Richard Corlett on the, supposedly, tricky naming of plants has only caused more confusion to an ecological audience already sceptical of name 'changes'. Corlett's discussion is essentially correct, although no distinction can be drawn between the substantival and adjectival forms of specific epithets named after people (Corlett's rhododendron examples). Stearn (1995) states that "attempts have been made without success to differentiate the application of these adjectival and substantival epithets", going on to give, amongst others, the following examples: Ceratostigma willmottianum and Rosa willmottiae both commemorate E.A. Willmott, who collected and described neither of them. Readers of Porcupine! describing new plants are recommended to consult Steam (1995: 286 et seq.) before fretting over 'corlettii' or 'corlettianum'.
TIM UTTERIDGE
utteridge@yahoo.com
Porc protests!
Dear Feedback,
Bring back 'Porc'!
GEORGE WALTHEW
Peterborough, EnglandDear Feedback,
Bring 'Porc' back!
MICHAEL LAU
KFBGDear Feedback,
Where was 'Porc' in the last issue? I hope he comes back soon.
MICHAEL BARKER
Arundel, EnglandThis is just a sampler of the overwhelming response we received following Pore's controversial exclusion from issue 18. Readers will doubtless be enthralled to discover Pore back in his rightful place for next issue - Ed.
P.7
Back to Contents
Back to Porcupine Homepage
Go to Department Homepage