Trichocereus naming of hybrids

[Average Joe]

What is the process involved in naming new hybrids?

scrolling through some of the auction sites I am bewildered by the names people attach to the clones they are selling. I can find no mention of them in any current literature. 
with a lot of new members joining the forum lately I thought this might be a good topic to clarify the actual process. 

[Black Rainbow]

In my understanding, botanists are a lot more strict about naming than horticulturalists. A botanical name requires a plant to be genetically distinct. A horticultural or cultivar name may only be visually distinct. 

I have many beautiful cuttings that have come to me unlabelled. As they are cuttings we can assume there are more of these plants in circulation, so I would not name these as it would cause confusion if the plant already had another name. Potentially, if I grew these cuts into large stands, and if the community and myself did not consider the plant identical to another, I might name the plant so people could trace it back to my collection. Still, I would prefer not to - the plant would have to be very distinct and I would need to distribute a lot of cuttings to make it personally justifiable. I might be slightly more willing to name a seed grown plant as it could be expected that there wouldn't be other clones of the same plant in circulation. Normally I prefer to avoid naming altogether. An unnamed plant might have a number or nickname in my personal collection but I probably wouldn't encourage people to label the plant as such. 

I understand naming etiquette to be based on communication. Before naming consider if it will help more people identify the history of your plant. A plant's history likely goes beyond you. Are you naming to increase value, your own reputation or to make it easier for people to understand which plant you are referring to? That's the important point for me.

Edited February 11, 2020 by Wile E. Peyote

[waterboy 2.0]

There is no formal convention. 

 

Some just make it up to hype sales. 

There is nothing stopping anyone giving names. Does help catch those that collect like Pokémon...  catch them all... Lol

 

It's a good way to keep track of clones with distinct traits . Although I'm of the opinion  a name should only be for a really unique plant... Otherwise it's just its parentage that's important to identify. 

 

Further to that I reckon it should go to those mature plants that get found(or grown out) , rather than a seedling unless absolutely distinct. I could give a name to every seedling in a batch of hybrid seed germinated

 

I've sold a few and passed on collection notes of mine if someone was interested if I've kept multiple seedlings out of a batch of seed. Which is usually a code, which is really more useful for me as I note a few things...may include seed source/location etc. But not claiming a Clone name on those. 

 

Some collectors have their own quirky ways of identifying what they have in their collections as well(probably including naming everything for some) . I do try to keep track of who a plant comes from. 

 

A member down here got onto a large non-pc pach that was very old and a fine looking thing, with notable traits.  I suggested it may be of use to give it a name, such as the town it came from. So it's more of an identifier, but IMO was worthy of distinction. 

 

That's my bent on it FWIW. 

I'm not a serious collector, I just like spikey  things and have a fair few of them. 

 

[Evil Genius]

Hey mate, the overall conventions on how to officially name plants applies to cacti as well. There's no registry that collects and regulates Cactus cultivars, but for a name to be officially recognized as cultivar you need to provide the following things. It's an excerpt from my hybrids book. 

 

[waterboy 2.0]

If there is no registry though it's a can of worms. It's using a formalised system without being formal re claiming a cultivar. Most anyway just call it a Clone name. 

 

I can't just do that with orchids as example (to claim cultivar) , to show I'm not being argumentative  

 

Who officially recognises it? Then it becomes who is or are authorities. Then there would probably be a need to recognise what publications are valid(?).

 

Doesnt solve the eBay "I'm gunna name the cacti to make more bucks" scenario.

One could craft a clever ebay description and try claim by those rules. (edit - if no authority) 

 

I am intrigued. Still messy. 

 

@Evil Genius

 

Edit- just woken... No coffee yet.. Lol 

 

Then is the "name" a Cultivar claim, a Clone name or identifier 

Edited February 11, 2020 by waterboy 2.0

[Black Rainbow]

According to the rules provided by EG, if a 'name' isn't published, I think the 'name' would be considered an identifier. I would imagine peer-reviewed publications would be considered more valid, but this is problematic as it restricts naming rights to active researchers. 

As most growers don't seem to know or abide by these rules, the validity of a name likely boils down to whether or not the name becomes part of the dominant discourse i.e. many growers start commonly using the same name. 

[Halcyon Daze]

The hybrid name and the clone name are 2 distinct elemements of any official name. For example an orchid may go by the name Dendrobium speciosum X Dendrobium tetragonum Hilda Poxon 'Measles' . So in this name, there is the botanical parantage, the registered hybrid name (Hilda Poxon), and the clonal name ('Measles').

 

When we name new seedlings we are actually skipping the 'hybrid' part and giving each one a 'clonal' name. Despite the fact they may or may not be a hybrid at all. Despite this I think we should retain as much parentage info as possible in names and labels.  

 

So naming cacti will prolly never fit into the same official system as other plants as the 'horse has already bolted' so to speak, but we can still retain as much info as possible.  

 

Some hypothetical examples may be Echinopsis hybrid 'Yowie' X Echinopsis peruviana 'Unicorn '

 

Or

 

Echinopsis pachanoi 'OP' X Echonopsis bridgesioid 'Lumberjack' 'Superspine'

 

Or 

 

Echinopsis unknown X Echinopsis peruviana  'Norma' 'Bluey'

 

Echinopsis unknown X Echinopsis peruviana 'Norma' 'Michelle'

 

Echinopsis unknown X Echinopsis peruviana 'Norma' 'Fred'

 

Etc

 

The only other thing I'd like to add is that I think it's important not to name them after potency etc. The pioneers have done a good job keeping a lid on this, so lets keep it that way, even if it ever becomes a ridiculous new craze to do so.

Edited February 13, 2020 by Halcyon Daze