Quote:
Originally Posted by kmarch  Hmmmm....There are a couple of potential problems here. 1) If the plant has not been awarded, then the cultivar name 'Ching Reuy' would not bear any authority. Cultivar names not given as a result of being awarded and not recorded in an awards register are not valid. If one of you had one of these and got it awarded, you would not be obligated to keep the 'Ching Reuy' cultivar name. 2) The second potential problem lies in whether it is a mericlone or not. If it is a mericlone, then it is not awardable. The original parent plant may still be awardable, but the mericlones would not be. |
I really must voice (perhaps again) my disagreement with the mentality that all clonal names must be followed by an award designation. I feel that it is only responsible to attach a clonal name to ANY plant being cloned, divided, or otherwise asexually reproduced, so as to avoid confusion. In the case of a plant being mass-cloned, it is absolutely imperative, in my mind. As an occasional seller and aspiring breeder of orchids, I would also say here that I designate clonal names to any plant I bloom out that I feel is either award quality or special. Should I decide to have a plant cloned, or divide it, I want the plant to be identifiable from others of it's cross or species, and should it be awarded elsewhere (division, keikei, whatever), I would much rather it carry my designated clonal name, considering I own the mother plant. Though there is no valid registry for such clonal names, I think it is perfectly acceptable to designate a clonal epithet for a plant one owns that one considers to be worthy of such, especially if one is a breeder/seller of orchids.
Even if I were not to designate a specific clonal name to a plant for reasons of it's quality, if I were dividing and sharing it or cloning it, I would designate a clonal name to avoid the possibility of someone inadvertantly having two of the same clone.
-Cj