Viewing post #269622 by krancmm

dave said:This has been my assertion for some time, and originally the database only supported one cultivar field. But Zuzu prevailed upon me that Roses needed multiple cultivar names, (and this seems to be true, even if it violates the ICNCP) but I think you're right that those cases should have been able to be handled using your "Also sold as" field..

Not really. Especially where a plant has an approved registration society (like roses), there is only one cultivar registered - and it will retain that name forever. So 'Radrazz' is the only cultivar registered. It's trade name is Knock Out (in U.S. at least), and maybe it's sold as other names elsewhere.

dave said:In this case, 'Polly' is the field we care about. "Alocasia x amazonica" is the latin name and identifies what kind of plant it is. That value belongs either in the primary latin name fields or else in the synonym fields.

So I would say "Polly" by itself would belong as one of the "secondary" cultivar names as it stands today, and in the future would move into an "Also sold as" field.

Again, not really. Alocasia x amazonica is incorrect as is Alocasia amazonica. Both 'Poly' and "Polly" are being sold under both invalid botanical names. It's only "correct" Latin name at this time is Alocasia 'Poly'. So I would argue that the entire incorrect name should be in the Also Sold As field.

dave said:I think what might be better still is to do away with "Trade Name" altogether, and have a series of fields where you can enter one by one all the names by which the plant goes, including the trade name.

Even and I had a private discussion about this and Trade Name is important as there is typically one TM or registered Trade Name. If a whole bunch were listed, someone would have to be careful to specify exactly what the breeder's Trade Name is. As you're using that in the header of the db, that would be very important. Goldrausch is the only Trade Name used by the breeder for example. That's what should appear if we aren't using 'Leukal 01' in the header, not GoldRush or Gold Rush or any other name.