S. Pink or "Pink"correct name in Database?

TIG, you are so smart. Bet everyone has learned a lot from you.

groan....

In that case, all you can do is list them in one big "generic" entry for the species, and note in the caption that they are pink, yellow, white, etc.

Are any of them being registered and/or stabilized?

Sylvia, thanks, but all I know is what I've learned from my friends who know so much more.
Terry, I doubt it. There are much bigger fish to fry at this point. With no history of them, it would take crossing them together, seeing if pods form, then crossing with a piece of the next one.....

The ICRA is working on it. None are registered as of yet. There are so many look-alikes and plants sold as "generic" that it will take a while to sort it all out. Parks, White Flower Farm, sellers on Ebay, etc....they all add to the confusion by selling as pink, white, yellow, etc. I remember seeing an earlier post about Walmart selling generic brugs.

EUGH!!! Do you really want my opinion Terry? *G*

Cultivars must not be in a Latinised form if they were introduced after 1958 (this isn't true for ferns but that's by the by here), so 'Insignis Pink' is wrong as would be 'Suaveolens Pink' (this you already know).

I've had a poke about and confusingly there was a Brugmansia suaveolens rosea which is now a synonym of B. x insignis pink (as is B. sanguinea 'Rosea'). The pink in the name is attached to the specific epithet and isn't capitalised as it's not a cultivar, but it isn't considered a varietas, subspecies or forma either.

Now to the nitty gritty, according to the RHS Horticultural Database, there is a plant or group of plants named Brugmansia suaveolens pink-flowered, again no cv, var., subsp. or f. simply as written above in a non-capitalised form next to the specific epithet. This (and B. x insignis pink)is considered an accepted name by the RHS.

This isn't an ideal situation from a taxonomic standpoint, it tells you nothing of the plant other than you can have a pink flowered B. suaveolens and there may be several pinks within this unsatisfactory name, but as it is recognised by at least one reliable body it might suffice for the PDB until something better comes along.

In the future we may see such registered names as B. suaveolens (Pink flowered Group) etc but they don't exist as yet.

Violabird,

I know it can get very confusing at times, stick with us and all will become as clear as mud *G*.

I think that clears it up pretty good :) How would you suggest they're listed in the database? ... "suaveolens pink" in the species box?... or "pink" in the cultivar box?

As we're using a names stated as acceptable, I think we should write it the same way as the RHS:

Genus: Brugmansia
Species: suaveolens pink-flowered

Well, unless anyone has objections, or other suggestions for us to use, I'm willing to "hang my hat" on RHS. It's certainly at least as reliable (and typically more so) than many other standards we could adopt. Baa and Sue, I'm counting on your help to go through the Brug entries and try to standardize them as much as possible...

This is NOT the most enjoyable aspect of gardening, and I want to thank everyone who has offered input, questions, and generally hung in there through thick and thin. Please keep the conversation going if there's more territory to be covered :)

excellent, I certainly think that the three of you know more about taxanomy than most anyone. Can't wait to see the new entry (mainly so I can see how to use it elsewhere)

I changed the ones we discussed here. Please have a looky and see if they look okay...

http://plantsdatabase.com/go/53696/
http://plantsdatabase.com/go/31563/
http://plantsdatabase.com/go/53696/

I also noticed this one of Monika's http://plantsdatabase.com/go/2544/ Did this one ever get a name?

I also have noticed that newbies and non-members like to plunk their unknown photos under which-ever entry seems handy at the time. If you see photos that don't belong in the specific entry, please use the "Report an error button" so they can be taken care of.

Sue, is there anyway to let the reader realize the brugs pictured are possibly and probably different varieties? Maybe come right out and say
Species: suaveolens unnamed pink flowered cultivars or maybe varieties?

Or, if the image is fairly recently, you can click on the "discuss this image" to get input from whoever posted it, and make sure they are aware that it might be misplaced. We're all learning as we go, and sometimes the best way to learn is from each other.

I'm doing some gentle scrubbing on the Brugs as I have time. Two entries that caught my eye were

Brugmansia x candida flore plena 'Schwabenmädel' http://plantsdatabase.com/go/3074/

vs. Brugmansia x candida 'Flore Plena' http://plantsdatabase.com/go/37929/

From a naming standpoint, these would appear to be synonyms. Can anyone tell me if they are botanically different? If so, we need to tweak the name of one or the other...

Actually Terry, I think those are two different hybrids. Flore plena is added to many of the x candida double hybrids.... and I think it's safe to say there is one named 'Flore Plena'.

Sigh. Beautiful plants; messy names ;o) I think I'm going to need (and get) a crash course in taxonomy before this is all said and done.

So...should the flore plena's be properly designated as var. flore plena?

and if that's a valid variety name, then can there rightly be a hybrid named Flore Plena, too? Or would it be simply Brugmansia x candida var. flore plena (no cultivar name...)

Kell, I think we might have been posting at the same time, and I didn't see your question to Sue. She may have another idea, but at this point, the best way to communicate is through captions and comments. Each image should have a caption that briefly states something about the plant and flower. You're also welcome to add a comment for each of these entries that explains there are many variations between the images because they are of unnamed seedlings grown by different people.

I'd also encourage each of you to keep track of where you've posted your images and if at any point you realize that an image is of a now-named/registered variety, let us know so we can create its own entry and/or move it to its rightful home.

Terry,

the photos i took were taken the 1st night they bloomed. if not mistaken, the reason violabird's bloom is different is cause it could have been taken when the bloom was fully opened.

when i added my photos to the Plant Database, i took info for verification purposes on these site...
http://www-bgard.sci.kun.nl/images/2729190a.jpg ->photo of the plant
http://www-bgard.sci.kun.nl/images/bgimages.htm#d -> names are stated on this site for further verification.

whenever i added any on my photo/s on the Plants Database, i make sure i researched them prior to making entry to the PD. some of the brugs i first grew came as unlabelled cuttings. i have to post and ask knowledgable people to verify my plant/photo to be sure of proper identity. crossed referencing them with some url's on the www.

Thank you, MaVie. We really appreciate the work you-all do to keep your entries as accurate as possible; as editors we try to do our part, too.

Most of the time our edits are subtle and done without any fanfare; they often involve a single email exchange with the contributor, sometimes not even that much (typos, etc.)

However, the original question raised by Violabird uncovered a much bigger issue, and it seemed wise to invite public commentary here before we made any editing decisions that affected many of the Brug entries.

I keep hoping someone else will chime in here :) As far as I can tell "flore plena" is used to decribe the double flowered brugs. Many of them are x candida but some are multihybrids. I see Monika has many in her book listed as .... Brugmasia hybr. flore plena 'Cultivar name'.

SooOOoo.... The entry with flore plena as the cultivar name should be changed.... I think :) Brugmansia x candida var. flore plena would be a generic double flowered x candida.... and if you ask me (but what do I know!)... that one and x candida 'Double White' are most likely the same plant. Does this make sense? Perhaps these two should be combined......

http://plantsdatabase.com/go/31562/
http://plantsdatabase.com/go/37929/

So now we are going to buy,sell,trade and/or give away
the brug we have previously known as Suav.Pink as B.Suav.pink flowered?Wonderful.
I think I will leave my website as is.It has worked so far.
Spend more time pulling weeds. :>)

Gone2seed

I didn't make the name B. suaveolens pink-flowered up myself just for the PDB or even the fun of it, I promise! ;) I stated above that it is an unsatisfactory name but it is accepted as valid at present.

It makes not one jot of difference to me under what name anyone buys, sells, trades or generally aquires plants but, as you know, in the PDB we try very hard to be as accurate as humanly possible with the current names as we do with all the information given there. :)

This message was edited Thursday, Aug 21st 3:43 AM

How bout we keep the common name as "Brugmansia suaveolens pink"? Seems like that's the common name that everyone knows. Could do the same for the versis and isignis varieties...

How to pollinate a special one?
You will need two names for each brug. One name for the bruggardener ( it is a pinkhybrid )

one name for the hybridizer( it is Rothkirch or Rosalie).
Way to go...Yellow, white, pink.

Why are you upset? It is a brug.I sent to you...

I don't get what you're trying to say, Luger. Are you sure you have the right thread?

I think I am right.

Baa and Poppysue, thanks so much for all your help. You guys do so much and deserve a huge hand. Thanks for organizing us, we need it!! I know I really appreciate you guys coming in and sharing your expertise with us. Most of us are home gardeners who do this for fun and friendship, no ego involved, so we really appreciate the help!

Edited to ad Terry to the list of hardworkers....LOL......how could I leave her out. She was the one that so bravely stuck her toe through this brug door that most would have avoided! LOL

This message was edited Thursday, Aug 21st 11:06 PM

Really!!!! Thanks from me too!

I'm sorry if I opened a can of worms, so to speak, but I do love to learn (:

Thanks Terry, Baa and Sue. I know you guys will get the database all straightened out for us.