406 



JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY. 



3. That one letter, preferably the initial letter, should be chosen 

 to represent each genus used in hybridizing : thus L for 

 Laeha, 0 for Oattleya, S for Sophronitis, and that the^se 

 letters should be used to form the names of the resulting 

 hybrids. Connecting vowels when necessary should be taken 

 from the initial vowels, and the letter " y " should be used 

 as a vowel sound between the components denoting the two 

 sets of parents. Thus " Lysoc " would denote the product of 

 Laelia x Sophrocattleya. 



[The names thus formed would seldom be euphonious, 

 and the method of formation would not always prove 

 sufficiently simple to grasp.] 



4. That the name of one of the genera entering into the com- 

 position of the hybrid be retained for it, as is the practice in 

 naming natural hybrids in other groups of plants, e.g. in 

 the Gramineae (see Eules of Nomenclature, Vienna Congress, 

 1905, Art. 32). 



[The name would then lack distinctiveness.] 



5. That the name be a commemorative one with a conventional 

 ending, such as " ara " or " orch," as Lawrenceara or Law- 

 renceorch. 



[The former ending is considered the more euphonious.] 



6. That the name be a commemorative one with the syllable 

 ** hyb " prefixed to indicate the hybrid origin, as 

 Hyblawrencea. 



[While distinctive, the constant repetition of the syllable 

 ** hyb " would be likely to lead to confusion, and would 

 be the reverse of euphonious.] 



These suggestions and comments, together with some dealing with 

 cognate matters, were sent in January 1909 to well-knowm botanists 

 and orchid specialists all over the world, and when the replies received 

 were considered it was found that the large majority were in favour 

 of the adoption of Suggestion No. 5. 



A few other suggestions on the subject were received, as a rule 

 involving slight modifications of those set out above, and carefully con- 

 sidered by the Committee, who finally drew up the following recom- 

 mendations and submitted them to the Council, who approved them 

 subject to their ratification by the International Congress of Horti- 

 culture which met at Brussels in April 1910. 



The whole question of the nomenclature of garden plants came 

 under consideration at that Congress, and a brief outline of the principal 

 findings is given in the report of the deputation from the Society (see 

 p. xcvi.). The rules of nomenclature agreed to at the Congress are not 

 yet published, but so far as can be ascertained there is among them 

 nothing repugnant to the recommendations made by the Committee 

 and approved by the Council. 



