[Taxacom] monoecious/dioecious in plant descriptions

[Peter Stevens]

Well, so long as you talk about monoecy plain and simple, then I  
think you can put that immediately before inflorescence, where it  
makes more sense, I think. But chacun a son gout ( as they might say  
if I had put in accents). Consistency!

P.
On Dec 4, 2011, at 1:35 PM, Mary Barkworth wrote:

> The first format is best because an individual plant cannot be  
> dioecious. Plants can be unisexual. If a plant is unisexual, so are  
> its inflorescences and flowers but if a taxon is monoecious, its  
> plants are bisexual and its inflorescences could be either  
> unisexual or bisexual but its flowers would be unisexual.
>
> Mary
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu [mailto:taxacom- 
> bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Sosef, Marc
> Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2011 11:58 AM
> To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> Subject: [Taxacom] monoecious/dioecious in plant descriptions
>
> Dear colleagues,
>
> I stumbled upon the question what the right/correct position is of  
> the words monoecious, dioecious, androdioecious, etc. in a plant  
> description. When browsing through quit some species descriptions,  
> in Floras as well as revisions, it seems there is no consensus at  
> all amongst plant taxonomists. The indication may appear roughly in  
> the following places:
>
> Monoecious. Plants up to 1 m high, ....
>
> Plants monoecious, up to 1 m high, .....
>
> ..... Inflorescence monoecious, axillary, ......
>
> ..... Flowers monoecious, on short pedicels, ......
>
> To me personally, the first, or maybe second option is most  
> appealing, but I am open for any well-defended other opinion. The  
> question is of course, are these terms an adjective, and if so to  
> the species, the plant(s), the inflorescence, the flowers, or what?
>
> best regards,
> Marc Sosef
>
> Netherlands Centre for Biodiversity Naturalis (section NHN),  
> Biosystematics group, Wageningen University Gen. Foulkesweg 37,  
> 6703 BL Wageningen, The Netherlands
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>
> The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either  
> of these methods:
>
> (1) by visiting http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> (2) a Google search specified as:  site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/ 
> pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>
> The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either  
> of these methods:
>
> (1) by visiting http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> (2) a Google search specified as:  site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/ 
> pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here