Schriften zu Genetischen Ressourcen - Genres

Theoretical and practical problems in the classification and nomenclature of cultivated plants
the hierarchy of life, and thus maximise the information content of the system (SCHUH
2000).
The hierarchical relationships of character-states and taxa was perceived even before
a scientific theory to account for it – Darwinian organic evolution – was put forward,
and long before a method, other than purely intuitive analysis, for constructing
such hypotheses – Hennigian cladistics – was discovered. The success of the intuitive
method is a result of the fact that our cognitive mechanisms are evolutionarily
adapted to deal with the hierarchical patterns of our world (RIEDL 1984).
From the above, it is clear that the following question must be posed. Do those taxonomic
groups of cultivated plants to which the nomenclatures of both the Botanical
and the Cultivated Codes may be applied likewise exhibit hierarchical structure, i.e.,
hierarchical patterns of relationships between character-states and between taxa?
The answer must be no, at least in part. This is acknowledged by the Cultivated
Code in its provision that a cultivar may be simultaneously assigned to more than
one cultivar-group, and cultivars as defined by the Cultivated Code can by no means
all be considered as products of processes analogous to Darwinian evolution, i.e.,
processes giving rise to a hierarchical relationship of character-states and taxa. Consequently,
hypotheses of hierarchical structure may not always give the most informative
classifications of cultivated plants. In other words, to paraphrase Ludwig Wittgenstein,
what is or is not a particular cultivar is for the public to decide.
Thus it may be concluded that, other things being equal, a system of categories and
names independent of those of the Botanical Code, such as those provided for by the
Cultivated Code, is to be preferred, at least for some groups of plants in cultivation. A
corollary of this may be, that a general term for taxonomic groups of cultivated plants,
other than “taxon”, such as, for example, “culton”, should also be preferred.
Practical considerations
This discussion leads us to pose, of course, the question: But are other things equal?
Here we pass from consideration of the theoretical to consideration of the practical.
In the practical employment of any regulated system of nomenclature for taxonomic
groups of plants, the following are some considerations of importance: ease and reliability
of determining the status of names; ease and reliability of determining the application
of names; and the user-friendliness of the system. These points will now be
discussed.
Determination of the status of a name involves ascertainment of whether or not it is in
accordance with those articles of the relevant Code governing valid publication (Botanical
Code) or establishment (Cultivated Code) and legitimacy (accordance with the
52