Post by Joseph Clemens on Jan 22, 2011 17:14:08 GMT
I was just discussing Cephalotus follicularis cultivars on another forum. The main topic was about seed produced by self-pollinating Cephalotus 'Eden Black'.
However, during this discussion, I realized that when Stephen Morley published his description of this cultivar, that he also published descriptions and photographs of two other unique Cephalotus clones, he called C. "Dudley Watts" and C. "Vigorous Clumping". Describing them as a possible parent or parents of the cultivar C. 'Eden Black'.
Could this co-publication qualify these other Cephalotus clones to be registered as cultivars in their own right? Or, are there other issues to consider before that could be? And, of course, Dudley Watts is apparently named for someone, which, I believe, would require their permission.
I think not. In the publication there is no description or statement on which to separate Dudley from any other vigorous ceph as far as I know. As for the name, I think Dudley Watts is the name of the person that gave this plant to Stephen. As Stepen himself also writes "Dudley Watts" and not 'Dudley Watts' it seems to me he doesn't consider it an official cultivar himself but as just a trade name.
The International Cultivar Registration Authority (ICRA) registers the names of cultivated carnivorous plants according to the International Code of Nomenclature for Cultivated Plants. I suspect that if someone in the future wanted to name a Cephalotus clone 'Dudley Watts', Steven could make the point that the name was previously and validly published in the description of 'Eden Black'. www.carnivorousplants.org/cultivars/description/Eden_Black_cultivar_web.pdf Whether the "Dudley Watts" description and photo already provided in the published 'Eden Black' description is considered adequate for official registration of the name would depend on Jan Schlauer, once he reviews the cultivar registration form. www.carnivorousplants.org/docs/crf/iraform2.rtf
It certainly appears to give a passing good description of each, C. "Vigorous Clumping" and C. "Dudley Watts". It also includes photographs of each. I don't believe that it matters if Stephen Morley originally intended to publish them as cultivars. Many of the cultivars that exist today were published before their was even an ICRA to register cultivars for CP species.
In the ICNCP, I wonder what description criteria, if any, exist. I believed that a Cephalotus cultivar description could simply be, "vigorous, rapidly clumping habit", "has dark colored pitcher leaves", or "large pitchered and darkly coloured". The registration submission form lists in item 9. "mention all diagnostic features". I am assuming this means the diagnostic features that make this particular plant unique, and not an exhaustive description of all aspects of the particular plant.
I hope to hear from Dr. Jan Schlauer, the ICR for Cephalotus, what his input on this may be.