Name Changes

Plant names are changed for three basic reasons.

1. Nomenclatural (to conform with the rules of the Botanical Code)
A change results in a new correct name while the former name becomes known as a 'synonym' and should no longer be used.

2. Taxonomic (as a result of a revised view of plant relationships)
"Taxonomy is the study of the principles and procedures of classification. A plant taxonomist reconsidering the classification of a particular group of plants has certain aims: to clearly delimit the taxa; to discern natural relationships; to produce a practical classification; and to ensure that plant names are correctly applied in relation to the type specimens." (Oh, so this is what Berg's been doing! :))

3. to correct a misidentification or misapplied name
"Plant identification is the act of determining the name of a plant (botanists actually refer to the is formal process as 'determination').
Misidentification-the act of giving an incorrect name to a plant.
Misapplication- the perpetuation of names resulting from an original misidentification. The name did not change, but the application of the name has.

From source of previous post. :)

infraspecific

"Infra" means "below" so when we talk about subspecies, varieties and forms, we are talking about infraspecific ranks.

Principles of the Botanical Code

(Spencer, R., Cross, R. & Lumley, P. 2007. plant names - A guide to botanical nomenclature.  Third edition. Melbourne: Csiro Publishing)

Principle 1: plant nomenclature, animal nomenclature and bacteriological nomenclature are independent.

Principle 2: the names of plants or plant groups are based on TYPES which, with rare exceptions, are actual dried specimens of plants.

Principle 3: nomenclature is based on priority of publication. This principle stresses the overriding importance of the first published name and, together with Principle 4, provides a means of determining which of several published names for the same plant is correct.

Principle 4: each plant or group of plants within a particular system of classification can bear only one correct name: the earliest one following the rules.

Principle 5: scientific names are to be treated as Latin.

Principle 6: rules of the Botanical Code are retrospective.

What I learn from ST 2137

What is Data?

"Data" is defined as

-things known (the attributes of Ficus species worldwide)

-assumed facts or figures

for which conclusions can be inferred. (which attributes are related to invasiveness, threatenedness)

What are the uses of data?

-To draw conclusions and make decisions (So which species are potential invasives and which species might we potentially lose forever? So we know which not to be cultivated and which to protect)

-To confirm statements (Is it true that smaller fig size mean more animals can eat and more well dispersed thus more weedy?)

-To make predictions on events to come (This species might go weedy, this might be threatened)

What is data analysis?

-The art of examining, summarizing, and drawing conclusions from data

-Transforming the data into knowledge.

Questions (hypothesis)-->Collecting data (which I don't do physically, unlike my other Honours friends)-->Analyzing data-->Answers/More questions/Any patterns/relationships (we all must do this and write it in our thesis)--> either conclude or collect more data

So technically all research students who work with data collection are doing data analysis.

Also Prof. Chan Yiu Man mentioned "we must get evidence to support what we believe in". This is my weakness. I must believe in Science. I must trust that the data and analysis method I use and produce evidence that creates knowledge and I must be able to stand by my work.

I work hard and I believe in what I do.

Fascination with Ficus

Sometimes I get a little disappointed. I am not still not good at doing research. I still don't quite get it. I might feel a little inferior to others actually.

But let me not do research to prove to others I can do it, rather, let me do it out of love, a passion for knowledge, to know and be known.

Sitting down here, looking at papers and websites, can get dry at times. I'm not very explorative (what an irony right?) but just now I was exploring Fig Web and I found faces, faces of Ficus lovers, Ficus researchers. Check out George Wieblen. He looks very extroverted and a fun person. And I see the smiles on their faces, the many many publications they have come up with... It's crazy, I mean they really love Figs, to do all these things. And they're people like my Professor, like my lab mates and possible people like me. 

Let this passion drive me to do work, not obligation.

I feel like I'm living in a world of Science.

taxonomic revisions

I am slightly stunned. 

I am reading a paper by C. C. Berg called "Proposals for treating four species complexes in Ficus Subgenus Urostigma Section Americanae (Moraceae)" [Blumea 52:295-312].

The problem with the Neotropical taxa of Ficus is that "The species complexes in Urostigma section Americana comprise a number of partly allopatric entities ('forms') that are morphologically so close that recognition is often very difficult or sometimes even impossible. Moreover, the pollinators of entities within within the complexes can be different, possibly implying genetic isolation" [Experientia 45:605-611].

Hmmm... I think basically what it means is that it is hard to classify these species because they are similar, yet different. So should we treat them as distinct species, or should we see them in a broader sense, as complexes or a common species/subspecies.

What Berg did was to propose a treatment for the four species complexes (F. americana, F. aurea, F. citrifolia & F. pertusa).

What stunned me was that many of the species known to be threatened are now being grouped together with others under one name. What that possibly could mean is that I might have less threatened species than previously thought...

It took me a long time to get used to this shifting and moulding, this plasticity of taxonomic groups. How one day, this species is here, another day, it's there when someone realizes it's been identified or evaluated wrongly. It's so flexible and changing. There are rules, but with new discoveries and knowledge, species are shifted around and sometimes ceased to exist when I suppose identified wrongly.

I feel very raw and new to this. A actually you probably can tell from the way I tried to explain what I know. I still can't grasp it proficiently at the moment. But I am in awed at the complexity and have started loosening up.

I used to think these things were fixed and do not change. But they do, they do!