[pbs] pbs Digest, Vol 68, Issue 19
Adam Fikso
adam14113 at ameritech.net
Mon Sep 15 18:15:10 EDT 2008
Another voice here--re the "x" in hybrids. It is the multiplication sign,
not the Greek chi. And it simply means "by" as in arithmetic,e.g., as in 2
x 4 for dimensions of lumber, or 24 x 50 as in measures of area, (a
multiplication ) , or measure of volume, e.g., 2 x 4 x 12; or for plants,
the former (female) by the latter (male). So there!! It is equivalent to
the (.) in some algebraic notations and simply left out in many algebraic
notations.
----- Original Message -----
From: <pbs-request at lists.ibiblio.org>
To: <pbs at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Monday, September 15, 2008 3:48 PM
Subject: pbs Digest, Vol 68, Issue 19
> Send pbs mailing list submissions to
> pbs at lists.ibiblio.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/pbs
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> pbs-request at lists.ibiblio.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> pbs-owner at lists.ibiblio.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of pbs digest..."
>
>
> List-Post:<mailto:pbs at lists.ibiblio.org>
> List-Archive:<http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/pbs>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: to italicize or not to italicize... (Jane McGary)
> 2. Re: to italicize or not to italicize...(off topic) (David Ehrlich)
> 3. Re: to italicize or not to italicize... (Jim McKenney)
> 4. Re: to italicize or not to italicize...(off topic) (Jim McKenney)
> 5. Re: to italicize or not to italicize... (Marguerite English)
> 6. Re: : Mirabilis jalapa (bonaventure at optonline.net)
> 7. Re: to italicize or not to italicize... (Jim McKenney)
> 8. Re: Mirabilis jalapa (John Grimshaw)
> 9. Re: to italicize or not to italicize... (totototo at telus.net)
> 10. Re: to italicize or not to italicize... (Jim McKenney)
> 11. List messages (Mary Sue Ittner)
> 12. Botanical Names & Italics (info at auchgourishbotanicgarden.org)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2008 10:47:13 -0700
> From: Jane McGary <janemcgary at earthlink.net>
> Subject: Re: [pbs] to italicize or not to italicize...
> To: Pacific Bulb Society <pbs at lists.ibiblio.org>
> Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.0.20080916103739.016e5c58 at pop.earthlink.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
>
> I can answer Jennifer's questions based on experience editing for
> horticultural publishers (and lots of others).
>
> All components of a species name (genus, species, subspecies, variety, and
> forma) are italicized, but the interpolated abbreviations subsp., var., f.
> are roman. In addition, when a subgenus or section is mentioned, though
> this is not part of a plant's name, it is italic. Families and higher
> taxonomic levels are roman.
>
> Common names are roman. Depending on the style adopted for a given
> publication, they may or may not be capitalized; I prefer the "down style"
> where capitals are used only for proper names (e.g., California poppy).
>
> Cultivar names are roman and enclosed in single quotes (and following
> punctuation goes OUTSIDE the end quote). The names of seed strains (e.g.,
> the lily seed strain Golden Splendor) are capitalized, presumably because
> they resemble trademarked brand names, but do not take the quotes.
>
> In regard to hybrids, there are some names such as Crocus x jessopiae that
> cover all crosses of two particular species. Such names are italic and
> separated by a multiplication sign, though in casual writing we usually
> use
> the letter "x" instead of the mult sign. A lily hybridizer told me that
> such names are rendered, in speech, by saying the mult sign as "cross."
>
> On Jennifer's specific question about names of groups of irises, "bearded
> iris" is a common name and is neither italic nor capped. "Oncocyclus
> irises" is a problem because the name is that of a
> section of subgenus Iris, and I would therefore capitalize it, but I would
> not italicize it except in the phrase "section Oncocyclus."
>
> One confusing aspect is how to treat taxonomic genus names that are also
> common names, or are being used in run of text like common names. The rule
> for English-language writing is that when the word is pluralized with "s"
> ("crocuses") or preceded by a word such as "a, the, these", it is
> lowercase
> and roman. A genus name alone is italic only when preceded by "the genus"
> or used without a preceding article (e.g., "Crocus includes species that
> flower in spring and that flower in fall"; "Eriogonum and Acantholimon are
> appropriate dwarf shrubs for the dry bulb garden").
>
> I'm sure there are other questions to do with this area of style, but
> these
> are the basic rules followed by most horticultural and botanical
> publications.
>
> Jane McGary
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2008 10:56:38 -0700 (PDT)
> From: David Ehrlich <idavide at sbcglobal.net>
> Subject: Re: [pbs] to italicize or not to italicize...(off topic)
> To: Pacific Bulb Society <pbs at lists.ibiblio.org>
> Message-ID: <423491.70409.qm at web81008.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> What got me was that while unable to deal with italics, underscores and
> such, it had no problem with the ? (eth) in Mr. Hafli?ason's name.
>
> Well, this letter (and some others) used to be in the English alphabet,
> too.? We still see it used in attempts at archaicisms as in ?e olde ...,
> which is now more commonly written ye olde..., because the ? has been
> deleted from our alphabet, and the y sort of looks like it.?
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2008 14:14:45 -0400
> From: "Jim McKenney" <jimmckenney at jimmckenney.com>
> Subject: Re: [pbs] to italicize or not to italicize...
> To: "'Pacific Bulb Society'" <pbs at lists.ibiblio.org>
> Message-ID: <001d01c9175e$efd99ab0$2f01a8c0 at Library>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Two things about Jane McGary?s response to this thread caught my eye.
>
>
>
> Jane, I?m curious about your recommendation to capitalize the initial O in
> oncocyclus. If we do not capitalize the initial letters of genera used as
> vernacular names, what justification is there for the capitalization the
> initial letter of a subgeneric taxon used the same way?
>
>
>
> Now on to something entirely different. You mention a crocus name ? there
> are some names such as Crocus x jessopiae?. Bowles published this name as
> Crocus jessoppiae (i.e., with two letters p) and, as if to forestall any
> ?improvements? of his spelling went on to cite the name of the eponym,
> Miss
> Euphemia Jessopp. I notice that both you and Brian Matthew use other
> spellings. I think this might be a case of great minds thinking alike, but
> incorrectly.
>
>
>
>
>
> Jim McKenney
>
> jimmckenney at jimmckenney.com
>
> Montgomery County, Maryland, USA, 39.03871? North, 77.09829? West, USDA
> zone
> 7
>
> My Virtual Maryland Garden http://www.jimmckenney.com
>
> BLOG! http://mcwort.blogspot.com/
>
>
>
> Webmaster Potomac Valley Chapter, NARGS
>
> Editor PVC Bulletin http://www.pvcnargs.org
>
>
>
> Webmaster Potomac Lily Society http://www.potomaclilysociety.org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2008 14:17:16 -0400
> From: "Jim McKenney" <jimmckenney at jimmckenney.com>
> Subject: Re: [pbs] to italicize or not to italicize...(off topic)
> To: "'Pacific Bulb Society'" <pbs at lists.ibiblio.org>
> Message-ID: <002201c9175f$4986e900$2f01a8c0 at Library>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> David Ehrlich wrote " What got me was that while unable to deal with
> italics, underscores and such, it had no problem with the ? (eth) in Mr.
> Hafli?ason's name."
>
> I'm glad you're here, David; keep it coming!
>
> Jim McKenney
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2008 11:21:27 -0700
> From: Marguerite English <meenglis at meenglis.cts.com>
> Subject: Re: [pbs] to italicize or not to italicize...
> To: Pacific Bulb Society <pbs at lists.ibiblio.org>
> Message-ID: <48CEA7A7.9060809 at meenglis.cts.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Thank you all for commenting on this. In the past, we have mostly
> followed Jane's guidelines but the question about the Iris descriptions
> got us thinking. My style book says to italicize non-English words, so
> I have done that, even in common names. I have to admit that I have
> accepted an author's styles when he/she seemed to have definite rules,
> so we have been inconsistent about this in the Bulb Garden.
> Marguerite
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2008 18:26:32 +0000 (GMT)
> From: bonaventure at optonline.net
> Subject: Re: [pbs] : Mirabilis jalapa
> To: pbs at lists.ibiblio.org
> Message-ID: <e3d4b11d6c061.48cea8d8 at optonline.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
>
> Hi Tsuh,
>
> I have this in my garden on the west side of my house. The yellow "breaks"
> though the magenta in varying amounts on different branches of the plants.
> These were the ones that survived best over the years coming from
> carrot-like taproots every year.
>
> Bonaventure Magrys
> Cliffwood Beach, NJ on the Raritan Bay
>
>
> i hope i did not ask this question before already. here in NYC, i see
> tree pits where M. jalapa has been naturalized. there are huge bushes of
> this plant. the interesting thing is, some plants produce both yellow and
> pink/magenta flowers. at first, i thought they were different plants, but
> actually they were from the same one. has anyone seen this before?
>
> =========
> tsuh yang
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2008 14:36:31 -0400
> From: "Jim McKenney" <jimmckenney at jimmckenney.com>
> Subject: Re: [pbs] to italicize or not to italicize...
> To: "'Pacific Bulb Society'" <pbs at lists.ibiblio.org>
> Message-ID: <002301c91761$f9f3a290$2f01a8c0 at Library>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> While I'm being so picky about how names are spelled, I should apologize
> to
> Brian Mathew for misspelling his name in that very post.
>
> Jim McKenney
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2008 19:36:13 +0100
> From: "John Grimshaw" <j.grimshaw at virgin.net>
> Subject: Re: [pbs] Mirabilis jalapa
> To: "Pacific Bulb Society" <pbs at lists.ibiblio.org>
> Message-ID: <010001c91761$ef44f470$0501a8c0 at home7c68b56fed>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> reply-type=original
>
> The multicoloured flowers of Mirabilis jalapa (pronounced, invariably, in
> England with a J :) ), in whatever form they are (i.e several colours in
> one
> flower or different coloured flowers on the same plant), are caused by
> transposons or jumping genes. See Wikipedia for further info on how they
> work. Essentially they cause mini-mutations during the colour production
> process.
>
> Jim Waddick mentioned Ipomoea 'Flying saucers' and roses as other plants
> with similarly flaky flowers, but one could add Geranium pratense
> 'Striatum'
> and various antirrhinums to the list. Other factors causing variation in
> flower colour may be virus, as in tulips (which probably works in much the
> same way as transposons) and possibly tissue chimaeras.
>
> John Grimshaw
>
>
> Dr. John M. Grimshaw
> Sycamore Cottage
> Colesbourne
> Cheltenham
> Gloucestershire
> GL53 9NP
>
> Tel. 01242 870567
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "piaba" <piabinha at yahoo.com>
> To: <pbs at lists.ibiblio.org>
> Sent: Sunday, September 14, 2008 8:04 PM
> Subject: [pbs] Mirabilis jalapa
>
>
>> but, john, what causes this phenomena? the ones that produce both color
>> flowers are in one particular corner. all others i have seen are just
>> magenta-flowered. is it a virus like the streaked tulips?
>>
>> =========
>> tsuh yang
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> pbs mailing list
>> pbs at lists.ibiblio.org
>> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/pbs
>> http://pacificbulbsociety.org/pbswiki
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
> Version: 8.0.169 / Virus Database: 270.6.21/1671 - Release Date:
> 14/09/2008
> 07:16
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2008 12:03:12 -0700
> From: totototo at telus.net
> Subject: Re: [pbs] to italicize or not to italicize...
> To: Pacific Bulb Society <pbs at lists.ibiblio.org>
> Message-ID:
> <19740414223344.FB393507380AB497 at priv-edmwaa06.telusplanet.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On 15 Sep 08, at 13:03, Jim McKenney wrote:
>
>> I have long regretted the lack of italics capability on this forum
>
> Lack of italics? Ah, dear people, the gurus who figured out how to make
> plain
> text email work, many eons ago, had a solution:
>
> /this is in italics/
>
> _this is underlined_ (and may get translated into italics per old
> typographic
> convention)
>
> *this is emphasized* (probably bold in print)
>
> Therefore I can write
>
>
> My patch of /Veriolitsis glomulama/, family Gloumlaceoideae, is blooming
> its
> silly head off at the moment. The local pipistrelle bats are very happy.
>
>
> See? Now, wasn't that just as easy as pie?
>
>
> On 15 Sep 08, at 9:34, David Ehrlich wrote:
>
>> . . . the x for hybrids is not the letter ex, but a multiplication sign;
> it?should not have serifs, and it should be centered with the text, not?on
> the
> line like an alphabetic letter.
>
> On Windows machines, alt+0215 gets it for you. On Unicode machines, e.g.
> Linux,
> it's a little trickier to compose characters in an analogous way, so it's
> probably easier to set it up in one of the character palettes where it can
> be
> easily accessed via the usual point'n'drool interface.
>
> That it disappeared is likely due to ? being transliterated to x in the
> mail
> list software.
>
> I suspect that all of us use computers that have the multiplication sign
> handy.
> This is a detail of the list software that might benefit from being
> revisited.
>
>
> --
> Rodger Whitlock
> Victoria, British Columbia, Canada
> Maritime Zone 8, a cool Mediterranean climate
> on beautiful Vancouver Island
>
> http://maps.google.ca/maps?q=48.4676,-123.3262&ll=48.4676,-123.3262&z=14
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2008 15:34:28 -0400
> From: "Jim McKenney" <jimmckenney at jimmckenney.com>
> Subject: Re: [pbs] to italicize or not to italicize...
> To: "'Pacific Bulb Society'" <pbs at lists.ibiblio.org>
> Message-ID: <002401c9176a$127130f0$2f01a8c0 at Library>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>
>
> Roger Whitlock wrote " Now, wasn't that just as easy as pie?"
>
> If you say so, Roger, but I would like more sugar in mine, please.
>
> And then he went on to say "I suspect that all of us use computers that
> have
> the multiplication sign handy."
>
> I still have not forgotten the day Jane McGary pointed out, in response to
> my then usage of the letter x, that the proper sign is the multiplication
> sign. I truly thought she was pulling my leg. I'm not sure what about this
> revelation floored me more, the fact that not only was Jane right, but
> that
> there are, on the one hand, people who think this sort of think is very
> important, and on the other hand, people who get paid to make these
> decisions. Hmmmm...I realize now that I made some faulty career choices.
>
> And anyway, in my heart of hearts I believe the symbol in question is the
> Greek letter chi, not a multiplication sign. The meaning is "cross" (as in
> "I crossed species A and species B), not "times" in the arithmetic sense.
> Whoever says "I timesed species A and species B"?
>
> Actually, in this modern computer world, x and ? are different entities,
> unlike in the world of vision, where they seem the same.
>
> Some of my friends, who occasionally criticize me for my ?species
> snobbery?,
> fail to realize that I grew up seeing the x before plant names and thought
> that meant ?cross that one off the list?. Now I'm much more sophisticated
> and know that the ? means "entering notholand".
>
> When I need it in windows, I make sure I?m in HTML mode, then click on
> Insert, Symbol, and the multiplication sign is there in the table of
> symbols. That?s the way I composed this message. I?ll convert to plain
> text
> now - and it's still there. Let's see if it makes it onto the posted form
> of
> this message.
>
>
> Jim McKenney
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 11
> Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2008 12:53:17 -0700
> From: Mary Sue Ittner <msittner at mcn.org>
> Subject: [pbs] List messages
> To: Pacific Bulb Society <pbs at lists.ibiblio.org>
> Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.2.20080915123309.034e9dd8 at mail.mcn.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
>
> Dear David,
>
> Messages to our list can only be in text. You must have sent yours both in
> html and text. The html (formatting) was stripped and the text remained.
> This is why some message sometimes appear blank when we get them. The html
> has been stripped and nothing is left.
>
> What's interesting about this is that formatting your messages to make
> words bold, a different font or size, underlined, italicized, marked
> through and adding images all make the message html. But it appears that
> there are some symbols that can be added that allow the message to be
> text.
>
> When we started this list, anything done in html came out unreadable in
> the
> archives so that's why we set it up for text. Also we hoped that using
> text
> would make for easier cross platform sharing and allowing everyone to read
> the message regardless of the equipment they used. Symbols are not always
> seen the same cross platform however even if the message is text.
>
> I'm sorry that made it difficult for you to share examples in the most
> recent thread. You can write Jen privately with your examples however
> since
> the whole purpose of the question was to help her with the newsletter.
>
> Mary Sue
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 12
> Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2008 21:50:18 +0100
> From: <info at auchgourishbotanicgarden.org>
> Subject: [pbs] Botanical Names & Italics
> To: <pbs at lists.ibiblio.org>
> Message-ID: <002201c9183d$d45f8030$0301a8c0 at homepc>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> There have been a couple of good submissions on this topic which for some
> readers might be spoiled or confused by the failure of some software
> incoming to correctly reflect text out going with ? in the place of etc,
> etc. This text is in OUTLOOK EXPRESS.
>
> If the following is of any use I will be glad to have helped, leaving
> aside the issue, if there is one, of European versus American protocols, I
> imagine your publication is read by and available to a much wider audience
> therefore the issue or generalisation stated sometimes as two countries
> separated by a single language might resonate for some. However, the
> language of Botany is not English of whatever stripe or any other, it is
> in Latin and thereby avoids national sensibilities really rather well and
> the convention which exists for the international community which may be
> reflected in your readership / membership would expect to see written
> botanical references in the conventional manner. i.e. Latin, which is NOT
> restricted to Europeans of whom only a small proportion are speakers of
> Standard English, e.g. programmes versus programs, colour versus colour,
> autumn versus fall, etc.
>
> For my book on "Lilies and their Allies" I am sticking strictly by the
> conventional presentation of botanical names as well as their association,
> where, if and when it occurs, with that of horticultural names, these two
> are quite specifically written differently to avoid confusion by readers
> who not unreasonably expect what they read or is presented for reading to
> reflect conventional accuracy. One of the most egregious examples of poor
> presentation is where a plant's Latin identity is present with both parts
> of the Bi-nomal in upper case / capital letter e.g. Lilium Japonicum
> Thunb. using no italics but bold type such as is often seen in glossy
> colour catalogues.
>
> Examples as follows: a. Lilium nepalense D.Don can also be written for
> references if these are thought to be required as
>
> b. Lilium nepalense D.Don in Mem. Wern.
> S. Edinburgh 3. 412 (1821);
> Syn. L. ochroleucum Wallich ex Baker,
> op cit. 231 (1874) pro.syn.- Lilium nepalense var. nepalense
> Baker in J. RHS. 4. 41 (1831)
>
> Where a species has produced a selection or form = forma it needs to be
> shown differently as another contributor has already correctly pointed
> out, e.g. a. Lilium longiflorum 'Holland's Glory' a strain developed from
> Lilium longiflorum f. takeshima The lower case letter ' f' is an
> acceptable abbreviation for the botanical term 'forma' which like subsp.
> and ssp. are acceptable versions for the term 'subspecies' along with
> 'cv.' the latter abbreviation denoting 'cultivar', all of which are not
> italicised and an hypothetical example would perhaps be Lilium
> hypotheticum subsp. carolinianum var. yanktsii f. pendula alba cv. 'Joe's
> Nightmare'
>
> There is a further point which might be of help, when an authority for a
> validly published name is cited, there has evolved a convention whereby
> some names can be abbreviated, but this isn't set in concrete, e.g. L. or
> Linn. for the Swedish inventor of the binomial system Carl Linnaeus,
> sometimes incorrectly written as Karl Linnea. Thunb. for Thunberg, etc
> etc.
>
> Lifting examples from Indexes in "Lilies" which might help, hopefully, are
> as follows and if considered in the context of the fact that where there
> are, roughly, some 120 to 140 taxa = distinct botanical plants either at
> species or subspecies level there are over 600 synonyms being names
> genuinely properly published but owing to the International Rules on
> Nomenclature the name first validly published by date is the name a plant
> MUST be known by in botanical literature. Perhaps the most inconvenient
> and inappropriate example of a botanical name I have come across if that
> of Lilium pensylvanicum Ker-Gawler (1805) for a plant Ker-Gawler
> mistakenly took to have come from North America because Mark Catesby 'sent
> it' from there when in fact Catesby got it from a Russian in Alaska, its
> homeland in fact being central & eastern Russia when, to correct his
> mistake, he re-published the name Lilium dauricum Ker-Gawler (1809). Such
> a adjustment might be accepted then however even the Ru
> ssians fully accept the name Lilium pensylvanicum, presumably through
> gritted teeth, because that is the correctly validly published name unless
> another were to turn up with an earlier date, so far I at least haven't
> found it. Using Lilium dauricum may be convenient or lax but it is never
> the less incorrect. I think in your journal, your efforts would be greatly
> appreciated, and admired by your peers, if you are rigorous in your use of
> correct nomenclature as it will then come to be trusted and be relied upon
> for your efforts to achieve accuracy. However much you try there will
> always be occasions when someone will bring to your attention an example
> or two of earlier published names in order to let you make appropriate
> adjustments, these take place in almost every Genus of botanical plants so
> are bound to happen.
>
> This 'note' has taken longer, much longer, than intended so thank you for
> baring with me, I only hope I have got it right. Should you have any other
> questions you might want to put to me, please feel free and do so direct
> if that's helpful, meantime best of luck with your worthy endeavour, would
> that everyone was as willing to be so meticulous. You might also like to
> Google up IPNI which is a site jointly run between RBG Kew and the Gray at
> the Arnold, type in the family if known and or the genus name this will
> 99.9 % of the time provide you with much of what you need, including
> synonymy where it exists.
>
> Iain
>
>
>
> --
> I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for home users.
> SPAMfighter has removed 18060 spam emails to date.
> Paying users do not have this message in their emails.
> Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> pbs mailing list
> pbs at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/pbs
>
>
> End of pbs Digest, Vol 68, Issue 19
> ***********************************
More information about the pbs
mailing list