I was recently viewing a site which had changed every name of every Neo on their site. I know a DeRolf when i see one even if they called "Circle Circus". If Micheal had one mis named im sure it wasnt intentional. Some of these plant "BROKERS" found a way to make a few bucks on us Bromo lovers but time will catch up to them

I have had Pukia Sparkle since its first release and it was always called Pukia whenever I have seen it. I read the Dyckipu thing a long time ago, it was funny. Dyckipu sounds like a new breed of small dog, Pukia sounds like you have the flu and are hurling. I wish they had thought of a totally different name because I really like my Sparkle.

The hybridizer called it Dyckipu..he must have liked the name

Well said,bihai ! LOL ...does it bark or barf ?
[and while I gotcha,some photos,soon,please ? ]
Bob ;)

I think Derek's a little too rigid about the rules on this. As long as it's two parts of the other genus names it should be okay, and anyway I remember reading that the first one to do such a hybrid is supposed to be the one who gets to choose, not the registrar! :-P

I like Dyckipu better than Puckia or Pukia, even though it does sound like it should have a ribbon in its hair. What is he going to do if somebody crosses a Canistrum with a Canistropsis, or a Neoregelia with a Neoglaziovia?

would they be a catastrophy and gelziovia
And I agree on the naming..thats mine dont touch it LOL

xCatastrophe...... I like it! LOL

And what's happen if there was a 'trigeneric' hybrid ?
Such as x Dyckcohnia' Conrad Morton' cross with a Hechtia...
it would be x Dyckcohtia or x Hechdyckcohnia!
Even a quardrigeneric hybrid :)

In orchid, there is some cultivated Genera of Vandoid group which were created for complex hybrids such as x Mockara that does not deal with its parentage's name.

or maybe a xHechticCatastrophe ? [I need help!] ;)

Trigenerics and quadrigenerics are much more difficult in bromeliads than in orchids, Stephania. Usually bigenerics are sterile, but not always, and they keep regrouping the genera so that things that didn't used to be bigeneric now are, and vice versa.

I'm trying to think if I've ever heard of anyone successfully making a trigeneric. It might be possible, but it all depends on how closely related things are. For example the genus Aechmea has several subgenera and the relationships don't seem to be that close. There are plenty of Aechmeas that won't cross with each other, but a lot of Aechmeas will cross easily with Porteas, so doesn't that mean that the genus lines are incorrectly drawn? I'm glad I'm not a taxonomist and don't have to figure it out-- I just try it and if it works, fine, and if it doesn't, then too bad.

I've made all kinds of weird bigenerics, but most of them aren't as attractive as monogenerics. I'd sure like to make a trigeneric though, just to make Uncle D's life difficult! ;-)

Lisa UD does a good job of that on his own. Maybe that explains his unpleasant personality and the reason many wont register plants anymore.

Yes Lisa, because man took place on earth after those 2,000 species of what
we just called "Bromeliad" which already flourished millions years before.

In the past, taxonomist used to determine and group living forms in plant kingdom
by observation the outside features, in fact, they didn't know exactly the plant's phylogenies.
Untill, they've recently studied into the genetic relationship,
that why today many members of plant families have been changed, lumping or spliting or even moving.

Anyway, today, there is no Streptocalyx, Abromeitiella and some known-genus
in bromeliad family anymore, as they were lumped into another genera,
but who exactly know that is ture...may be God!

About 'Uncle Derek', I'm myself really appreciated all of his works and articles.
There should to be someone like that in the bromeliad world.

(sorry for my english !)

Bobs ramble : Very interesting comments above.When I first became interested in bromeliads in the 1980's,it was because of their varied and colorful appearences and inflorescenses.How could there be such variety in a plant family, I thought.But thats exactly what caught my interest.Years later,with the help of the BSI Journal,and brom books,I began to take a deeper interest due to all the revisions,as Stephania points out,and in Lisa's comments as well. I really questioned the reasons some species and genera were changed because of some not easily visable trait,that was someones personal opinion,scientific or not. I felt,'if it looks like a 'X',and grows like an 'X',it should be called an'X',too.'I first noticed this in Tillandsia vs Vriesea. [I envisioned all the many crosses nature made before mankind even discovered bromeliads,and how man took up from that point,as what to call each one,as if we really knew the history. The time and effort to bring us to the point we are at today in our knowledge is not to be minimized tho,and thankfully,there were those at the beginning that dedicated their lives to it.]
But that part of the modern bromeliad world did'nt mean much to me,as did the outward appearences of the plant.But what ever the name assigned,I always wanted my plants to be identified correctly.It just seems right to have a order in the system.Hdd recently pointed out how 'plant brokers'change names just to attract buyers.That surely adds confusion to a system that strives for orderliness,and is just plain wrong. Even used car lots don't do that to sell more cars. So anyway,I continue to select my plants by their eye appeal,not by scientific or taxonomic correctness. And whatever changes or revisions take place,I plan on going along with them,and plant tags will change to match up with the system in place.But I will buy them because they look terrific to me! Bob

There are a lot of unscrupulous people in the world, and the bromeliad world is no exception. Just ask anyone who's ever had their hybrid tissue cultured if the labs ever kept any for themselves and released it under another name. It happens all the time. Not all of the cultivar name confusion is intentional, though. Someone buys a plant without a tag and they want to call it something so they put an unofficial name on it and it gets circulated as such. Or someone looks at the FCBS photos and thinks "that looks kinda like my plant, it must be that" when it isn't. But none of us ever do that, do we? ;-)

As to our favorite Uncle, he knows his style puts a lot of people off, but the bottom line is that somebody's got to do the job and nobody else stepped up to take it on after Don stepped down. He is a very knowledgeable guy, and his quibbling does have a place when you're talking about species. Hybrids are a different matter, though, and I don't think he sees things from a hybridizer's perspective like Don did. This can make for some fairly frustrating exchanges.

I know that taxonomy is moving more towards DNA rather than morphology these days, and I don't know if that's really a better sytem or if it will just raise more problems than it solves. I can see where it would be very helpful in dealing with a genus like Cryptanthus, where almost all of the flowers of the different species look identical, at least to my eyes. Foliage characteristics have never really entered into taxonomic classification very much, it's mostly floral structure, and yet I challenge anyone to tell the difference between two Crypts without looking at the plant itself. If we have to get out an electron microscope and look at its chromosomes before making an ID, that's going to make it hard for all the people who post their plant pictures here looking for a name!

That's it !!!
It means, one don't need to pay more money for another Dyckia 'Golden Glow' or 'Moon Glow' or 'Sun Glow' which were listed in one's catalog, if some body, like Uncle Derek or reliable people, stated that all of them is exactly the synonym of the original registed Dyckia 'Yellow Glow'. In the mean time, one should to buy a new Dyckia 'Orange Glow' if there would be such a cultivar had been occured and registered, officially.

And no matter what they call, 'Puckia' or 'Dyckipu', we just love to grow them both !