About the Oak Name database

PLEASE READ THESE NOTES BEFORE CONSULTING THE DATABASE

THE PURPOSE OF THE DATABASE

The reason for making this database public at this stage is primarily to (a) provide a checklist of all cultivar and Group names known to the Registrar (hopefully so as to avoid future duplications of a known name) and (b) to enlist further comment and feedback from any interested parties prior to the publication of a full Register of oak cultivar names. It is hoped that that even at this stage, the information here presented will be of use to a range of parties including authors and those who maintain lists of stabilized names.

THE RULES OF NOMENCLATURE

The naming of cultivars and Groups is governed by the International Code of Nomenclature for Cultivated Plants (ICNCP). In these brief notes, what applies to cultivar names also applies to Group names.

A cultivar name becomes fixed upon its establishment in a printed publication. As from 1 January, 1959 such works have to be dated at least to the year. The date of a name is the publication date of that work, whether it is a book or a magazine article or even something more ephemeral such as a nursery catalogue. In a part work or in a loose leaf binder, each loose part or sheet has to be dated at least to a year. Qualifying publications must be of the kind that are likely to be recorded in horticultural libraries. The mere placing of a name on a plant label or the communication of a name at a public meeting does not count as publication, nor does the placing of a name on a website or on a CD-ROM count as publication. Confidential trade lists are specifically excluded as a means of publication. (See ICNCP Arts 22-23 for further information.)

Once it can demonstrated that a cultivar name has been published, one then has to check to see that it is properly established. This means that the words of its epithet have to be in conformity with the rules of the ICNCP (Art. 19) and that after 1 January 1959, have to be in a language other than Latin and be accompanied by a description or by reference to a previously published description. A name in which the epithet is identical to, or is confusingly similar to, one that has already been published in the genus (a homonym or parahomonym) is not established. (See ICNCP Art. 24 for further information.)

Many cultivar names (especially those for woody plants) pre-date the 1959 Rule and their epithets might appear in Latin form. This is quite acceptable if the names were originally published in conformity with the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature (ICBN) and to use the terminology of that code are “validly published” (equivalent to “established” under the ICNCP). Before the advent of the ICNCP, many authors of cultivars used much older formal designations under the ranking systems provided by the ICBN. Under the rules of the ICBN, properly formed names without a description are not validly published, but under the ICNCP these may be accepted as established if they are considered to represent cultivars.

One of the prime tasks of an International Cultivar Registrar is to prove that a cultivar name has been properly established. This can be painstaking work since, in the first instance, every name seen has to be checked for the earliest known place of publication. Since the regulation of botanical nomenclature starts from 1 May 1753 (the date of Linnaeus’s Species Plantarum which started the whole system of binomial nomenclature), this means that, in theory, every work published since then has to be checked for new names. Luckily, there have always been people prepared to do this and lists of species names exist for Registrars to check. However, the systematic historical listing of what we now term cultivar names is sadly lacking (as it is generally for all names under the rank of species) and it is up to individual Registrars working within "their" plant groups to set the record straight.

In this database compiled for the International Oak Society, I have systematically checked the past and present literature as far as one can (see the bibliography page) and am fairly confident that the resulting listings are pretty complete. Of the 2000+ entries in the database, I have found over 730 names to which people have assigned cultivar status in the past. About 300 of those names are now either (a) synonymized with another name or (b) are not recognized as being true cultivars but represent wild occurring variants of a species or (c) are not names but trademarks or (d) are not considered (by me) to have been properly published or established. About 430 cultivar or Group names are currently accepted as registered in this database.

There is more to this database than just a listing of cultivar names. Since so many nurseries, especially in the USA, market oaks under a common name rather than their scientific name, I have compiled a comprehensive listing of 260 common names in the English language and cross-referenced these to their scientific names. Be warned! A number of common names are applied to more than one scientific name.

Again, since a number of cultivars are marketed under the wrong scientific name, I have compiled a comprehensive list of correct Latin names (with their spellings verified) for all species and hybrid species of oak. Any synonyms that I have seen being used in the horticultural literature since the 1950s are cross-referenced to the currently accepted names. Please note that the overall synonymy is not supposed to be complete and it does not include long-forgotten or obscure names (which may, and probably should, stay forgotten or obscure!).

READING A REPORT

A full name report for a cultivar gives the full scientific name of the cultivar including any Group designation that might be given. A name that is in bold face indicates that it is properly established according to the rules of the ICNCP and that it is not considered to be a synonym. This is followed by the name of the author (in abbreviated form) who first published the cultivar epithet along with details of where the epithet was first published (book and serial names again abbreviated) and the date of publication of the name by year. If the epithet originally appeared as part of a different name or with a different spelling, this will then be given within double quotation marks in the form that the original author presented the name. A short comment may then appear on the status of a name, viz: nom. cons. - nomen conservandum (a name that has been conserved over another, usually to save a widely used name from becoming a synonym); nom. illegit. - nomen illegitimum (one that is either a later homonym or that was superfluous when published); nom. ined. - nomen ineditum (one that does not appear to have been properly published); nom. non. ratum (one that is not established under the rules of the ICNCP); nom. non rite publ. - nomen non rite publicatum (one that is not validly published under the rules of the ICBN); nom. rejic.- nomen rejiciendum (one that has been explicitly rejected in favour of another); orth. var. - orthographia varia (an orthographical variant of an accepted spelling); pro sp. (indicating that a hybrid name was first published as a species name). If the ICRA sign appears at the end of the line, this indicates that the cultivar name is accepted in this work as being registered.

A full name report for a species or other botanical name will only show the author and date of a name with a few other details as noted above while a report on a trademark or common name will only point one towards an accepted name.

There may be other sets of information given lower in the report under the following headings:

Parentage of hybrids (nothospecies) states the names of the supposed pollen and seed parents in alphabetical order.

Nomenclature Note will give brief details as to the reason why a name is not accepted and if the reason is because it is contrary to a Code rule, a reference to the Code and Article in question will be given. In addition, any basionym of a specific or infraspecific name is provided within this note.

History gives an account of the origins of the cultivar along with details of any raiser or introducer where this is known.

Description gives a brief description or diagnosis of the cultivar or refers one to where a full description may be found. Please note that both the history and description notes have yet to be written up for most of the cultivars.

Natural Distribution gives an idea of where a naturally occurring species or hybrid and its varieties may be found. It is planned to expand this information in time.

Synonyms in This Database lists the names together with their author and date which are placed in the synonymy of an accepted name. Clicking on such a name will lead you to the full name report on the synonym.

Named Hybrids (under a species name) gives a listing of those hybrid formulae known to be given a name. Clicking on the name will lead you to a full name report. NEW FEATURE

Main Horticultural References lists the core horticultural works and page reference in which further information may be found. Clicking on the short title of a particular work will provide a full bibliographic reference for the work in question.

Monograph References will similarly identify a recent work on oaks that may contain useful information. Unfortunately, there are too few such works at present (Hint for someone to write a full monograph!).

Nomenclatural Standard indicates the herbarium specimen, illustration, or other documentation to which the name is permanently attached.

Standard Image shows a thumbnail image of a nomenclatural standard which may be enlarged by clicking on the image. MANY IMAGES NOW UPLOADED

Various icon buttons may appear at the bottom of a page which may guide one to further information on other web servers. The Registrar cannot be held to account if data found via these buttons is wrong or misleading.

PLEASE REMEMBER!

A work of this sort is never finished. There is always more information about a cultivar to discover and the dataset will be added to from time to time. If you know of anything that might help complete the picture, please get in contact with the Registrar. Of particular value would be information on printed publication of any name listed with the comment "further information required".

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

(to be completed)

Piers Trehane, 24th May, 2007, revised 27th July, 2007

International Cultivar Registrar for the International Oak Society, the International Cultivar Registration Authority (ICRA) for the genus Quercus.