Thanks for the info. It makes some sense that a variety would be applied when there is some minor variation in species, but nothing interfering with the success of offspring. Seems to me that if the fields of systematics and taxonomy ever reawakens there is a lot of work to be done regarding subspecies.

With the ability to look at DNA it is likely that taxonomy will go through another upheaval and perhaps new definitions will be put forward that will resolve the variety, subvariety, subspecies, hybrid mess.

I have been very disappointed with changes in family names. It would have been better to use the family name to express a commonality in the family rather than pick on a representative species. Poaceae has much less meaning than Graminae - Leguminosae has more to say about the legume family than Fabaceae. This probably will change yet again, hopefully for the better. I suspect that the "type species" will make no sense when the genetic ancestry is better understood.

C.

I don't think that your sarcasm is warrented. I just added that because i felt it helped the conversation. Sorry if i have somehow offended your scientific sensibility, particularly since I in no way contradicted what you said

I couldn't find any specific information on the difference between subspecies and variety in the Jepson Manual (scientific enough for you?), but I do note that on page 1315 subspecies counts and varietal counts are combined.

I found the following information at the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature (www.bgbm.org/iapt/nomenc...istitle.htm)

CHAPTER I. TAXA AND THEIR RANKS
Article 4
4.1. The secondary ranks of taxa in descending sequence are tribe (tribus) between family and genus, section (sectio) and series (series) between genus and species, and variety (varietas) and form (forma) below species.

4.2. If a greater number of ranks of taxa is desired, the terms for these are made by adding the prefix "sub-" to the terms denoting the principal or secondary ranks. A plant may thus be assigned to taxa of the following ranks (in descending sequence): regnum, subregnum, divisio or phylum, subdivisio or subphylum, classis, subclassis, ordo, subordo, familia, subfamilia, tribus, subtribus, genus, subgenus, sectio, subsectio, series, subseries, species, subspecies, varietas, subvarietas, forma, subforma.

4.3. Further ranks may also be intercalated or added, provided that confusion or error is not thereby introduced.

4.4. The subordinate ranks of nothotaxa are the same as the subordinate ranks of non-hybrid taxa, except that nothogenus is the highest rank permitted (see App. I).

Note 1. Throughout this Code the phrase "subdivision of a family" refers only to taxa of a rank between family and genus and "subdivision of a genus" refers only to taxa of a rank between genus and species.

Note 2. For the designation of certain categories of plants used in agriculture, forestry, and horticulture, see Art. 28 Notes 2-5.

Note 3. In classifying parasites, especially fungi, authors who do not give specific, subspecific, or varietal value to taxa characterized from a physiological standpoint but scarcely or not at all from a morphological standpoint may distinguish within the species special forms (formae speciales) characterized by their adaptation to different hosts, but the nomenclature of special forms is not governed by the provisions of this Code.


Considering 4.1 and 4.2 above, the category of subspecies would seem to fall between the rank of species and variety. Thus you could have a single subspecies with several varieties, but not the other way around.

Is that scientific enough for you Mr. Snarky?