The <i>International Code of Botanical Nomenclature</i> (ICBN), the <i>International Code of Nomenclature for Cultivated Plants</i> (ICNCP), and the cultigen

Spencer, Roger; Cross, R. J.

doi:10.2307/25065875

Cited by 12 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although the phrase "cultivated plant" is widespread and often used to refer to domesticated plants, many cultivated plants are simply wild plants that are cultivated, and the different concepts should not be confused. The term "cultigen" has been used to refer to domesticates in a broad sense, but has been employed in such different ways (Spencer, 1999;Spencer & Cross, 2007a, b) that its use can be confusing.…”

Section: Domestication Complicates Classificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evolution and Classification of Cannabis sativa (Marijuana, Hemp) in Relation to Human Utilization

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cannabis sativa has been employed for thousands of years, primarily as a source of a stem fiber (both the plant and the fiber termed "hemp") and a resinous intoxicant (the plant and its drug preparations commonly termed "marijuana"). Studies of relationships among various groups of domesticated forms of the species and wildgrowing plants have led to conflicting evolutionary interpretations and different classifications, including splitting C. sativa into several alleged species. This review examines the evolving ways Cannabis has been used from ancient times to the present, and how human selection has altered the morphology, chemistry, distribution and ecology of domesticated forms by comparison with related wild plants. Special attention is given to classification, since this has been extremely contentious, and is a key to understanding, exploiting and controlling the plant. Differences that have been used to recognize cultivated groups within Cannabis are the results of disruptive selection for characteristics selected by humans. Wild-growing plants, insofar as has been determined, are either escapes from domesticated forms or the results of thousands of years of widespread genetic exchange with domesticated plants, making it impossible to determine if unaltered primeval or ancestral populations still exist. The conflicting approaches to classifying and naming plants with such interacting domesticated and wild forms are examined. It is recommended that Cannabis sativa be recognized as a single species, within which there is a narcotic subspecies with both domesticated and ruderal varieties, and similarly a non-narcotic subspecies with both domesticated and ruderal varieties. An alternative approach consistent with the international code of nomenclature for cultivated plants is proposed, recognizing six groups: two composed of essentially non-narcotic fiber and oilseed cultivars as well as an additional group composed of their hybrids; and two composed of narcotic strains as well as an additional group composed of their hybrids.

show abstract

Section: Domestication Complicates Classificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evolution and Classification of Cannabis sativa (Marijuana, Hemp) in Relation to Human Utilization

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition to standard Linnean scientific names, there are several formal and informal systems for nomenclature used to assign labels to specific taxa. One formal class of such names is plant cultivars, which are governed by an international code of nomenclature (Brickell et al, 2009;Spencer & Cross, 2007;Stearn, 1953;Trehane, 2002). Similarly, certain trade names have important meaning and standing in some countries or taxonomic groups (e.g.…”

Section: Names Outside the Scope Of Linnean Nomenclaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Towards a global list of accepted species V. The devil is in the detail

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A consensus among biologists has been growing in recent years for the development of a global list of accepted species (and other taxa). To date, much discussion has focused on visions for how such a list would benefit many scientific and societal disciplines. Less emphasis has been placed on understanding the many technical challenges of compiling and maintaining such a list. Challenges include details of implementation such as defining what each entry on the list represents, the scope (taxonomic breadth), granularity (only species, all taxonomic ranks, unnamed operational taxonomic units), and level of confidence in the status of individual list entries. The specific properties and minimum information requirements of list items need to be defined, and a process for ensuring accuracy, consistency, and noting uncertainties, needs to be adopted. Perhaps the greatest technical challenge is in developing the procedures by which the global list is created, updated, and maintained. Considerations of how to incorporate obscure and newly described taxa, the extent and specific implementation of a review process, and mechanisms for arbitrating disputes or alternative taxonomic viewpoints will need to be addressed through an open and transparent process with broad engagement from multiple communities. Details concerning how the global list can be accessed, how it will be maintained, and the way in which the list and its contents are properly cited need to be determined. Many of these issues have been considered and sometimes solved by the Catalogue of Life, which should serve as the core foundation for the actual implementation of any global list of species.

show abstract

“…While in its original form [64], cultivar and the related construct 'cultigen' may provide some sanctuary, providing a useful non-taxonomic structure of cultivated but not necessarily fully domesticated plants, in recent years the term has been refined. Cultivars are specific things, required to be stable, uniform, and distinct to gain their epithets [65]. Proto-indica (and other plants under domestication) were not stable by the very fact they were under domestication (see Fuller's [59]: Figure 2 for examples of the branching in the model).…”

Section: Domestication and Proto-indicamentioning

confidence: 99%

Is Domestication Speciation? The Implications of a Messy Domestication Model in the Holocene

Bates

2021

Agronomy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Domestication is one of the fundamental process that has shaped our world in the last 12,000 years. Changes in the morphology, genetics, and behavior of plants and animals have redefined our interactions with our environments and ourselves. However, while great strides have been made towards understanding the mechanics, timing, and localities of domestication, a fundamental question remains at the heart of archaeological and scientific modelling of this process—how does domestication fit into a framework of evolution and natural selection? At the core of this is the ontological problem of what is a species? In this paper, the complicated concepts and constructs underlying ‘species’ and how this can be applied to the process of domestication are explored. The case studies of soybean and proto-indica rice are used to illustrate that our choice of ‘species’ definitions carries with it ramifications for our interpretations, and that care needs to be made when handling this challenging classificatory system.

show abstract

The International Code of Botanical Nomenclature (ICBN), the International Code of Nomenclature for Cultivated Plants (ICNCP), and the cultigen

Cited by 12 publications

References 4 publications

Evolution and Classification of Cannabis sativa (Marijuana, Hemp) in Relation to Human Utilization

Evolution and Classification of Cannabis sativa (Marijuana, Hemp) in Relation to Human Utilization

Towards a global list of accepted species V. The devil is in the detail

Is Domestication Speciation? The Implications of a Messy Domestication Model in the Holocene

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About