Ceropegia

Use this forum to discuss matters relating to succulent Asclepiads, including Stapelia, Huernia, Orbea, Adenium, Pachypodium and related species.

Moderator: mickthecactus

Ceropegia

Post Number:#1  Postby mickthecactus » Wed Feb 14, 2018 7:56 am

Ever come across The National Gardening Association?

In their database they seem to have lumped all Stapeliads into Ceropegia - https://garden.org/plants/search/text.php?q=huernia

What's that all about?
User avatar
mickthecactus
Moderator
 
Posts: 980
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 5:36 am
Location: Hertfordshire UK.

Re: Ceropegia

Post Number:#2  Postby mcvansoest » Wed Feb 14, 2018 10:09 am

Catalogue lof Life. That is what that is all about.

Initially I was really excited about the database at the NGA, as it allows for a lot of plant specific information to be entered, but I soon found out that they strictly and unbendingly adhere to nomenclature and taxonomy according to the Catalogue of Life, with some noted exceptions that no one is willing to explain. It looks like in the CoL, Huernia is apparently considered a synonym and Ceropegia is the accepted name.
I guess I can understand picking a source for nomenclature and taxonomy and sticking to it, but their adherence is so strict that even if you present what most of us would probably find convincing evidence as to why a plant should be included in spite of CoL they will not. I have been in some battles with database moderators over an Aloe or two and an Agave here and there, where CoL appears out of date or at least incredibly out of touch with the plant specific literature. Unsuccessfully... So I have given up. I communicate with some people there who have not made it over to Agaveville, but I have stopped trying to add to their database.
It is what it is!
User avatar
mcvansoest
Moderator
 
Posts: 1135
Joined: Sun Aug 25, 2013 12:22 pm
Location: Mesa, Arizona, USA ie. Low Desert & Urban Heat Island

Re: Ceropegia

Post Number:#3  Postby mickthecactus » Thu Feb 15, 2018 1:29 am

I have some more information on this.

I spoke with John Pilbeam, author of the excellent book Stapeliads last night and it seems that Peter Bruyns who is THE expert on Stapeliads has decided that the rule of prior description should apply so has gone all the way back to Linnaeus in 1753 who first described them all as Ceropegia! Thus Hoodias, Pseudolithos, Stapelia whatever are now Ceropegia! Quite ridiculous and nobody is going to accept that.

It's like having all cacti in the genus Cactus or all trees in a genus Tree.
User avatar
mickthecactus
Moderator
 
Posts: 980
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 5:36 am
Location: Hertfordshire UK.

Re: Ceropegia

Post Number:#4  Postby mickthecactus » Tue Feb 20, 2018 1:24 am

From another forum:-

Yes, he hasn't decided the rule of priority should apply: it applies. It's more that, having decided to combine several genera, his choice of Ceropegia for the genus into which he transfers the others is based on priority - it will be the oldest of the genera he has combined.
I can't access the article but there's a hint of his reasoning in the abstract at https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... 9916339242
User avatar
mickthecactus
Moderator
 
Posts: 980
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 5:36 am
Location: Hertfordshire UK.


Previous topic Next topic

Return to Apocynaceae Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests