Value of 'naming'

Mon Jul 15 08:54:29 CDT 1996

On Fri., Jul 12, Jerry Bricker <lcjbrick at ANTELOPE.WCC.EDU> wrote:
>I have always been impressed with the ornithologist's approach to naming

>In any case, I started thinking that botanists might be well served by
>the ornitholigist's lead.  As there are several hundred thousand more
>plant species than bird species, I would begin with a list of cultivated
>plants and work from there...
>Jerry Bricker

There have already been some attempts to do just that - perhaps not
trying to establish a "standardized" name, as often more than one is
listed, but at least "provide" a common name for many of the
US's plants:

Terrell, E.E., S.R. Hill, J.H. Wiersema and W.E. Rice. 1986. A
Checklist of Names for 3000 Vascular Plants of Economic Importance.
USDA-ARS Agriculture Handbook no. 505, 244 pp.

Brako, L., A.Y. Rossman and D.F. Farr. 1995. Scientific and Common
Names of 7,000 Vascular Plants in the United States.  APS Press
(American Phytopathological Society), 295 pp.

I find it interesting to note the "publishers" of each of these.  Maybe
plant taxonomists don't see the need for common names, but other
"end-users" certainly do.  'Nuff said...
Deb Lewis
Deborah Q. Lewis, Curator
Ada Hayden Herbarium (ISC)               Ph.: [1]515/294-9499
Department of Botany                     FAX: [1]515/294-1337
Iowa State University              E-mail: dlewis at
Ames, IA  50011-1020 U.S.A.                 (or as in header)

More information about the Taxacom mailing list