I think it's already been stated that a 10 year plan is in effect. My memory tells me so (having to do with timing - when a certain group of people meet possibly as being the reason).

Thanks,

Dax

Ten year plan to accomplish what? I somebody really working on getting ALL the extant conifer cultivars analyzed? With new ones constantly coming out, this is not possible of course. Then there is the matter of those with limited distributions and availability, both wild species and garden forms.

Dax did say "NOT including cultivars"!

A list like this will inevitably include a certain amount of opinion - is X a distinct species, or just a subspecies of Y? Should Z be given its own genus, or be treated as being in a subgenus of a closely related genus?

In a sense, it has already been done, with the Kew Checklist of Conifers, but there again, many people do not agree with all of the decisions taken there.

Also, there is always the possibility of new discoveries in poorly explored areas, just like Wollemia was a few years ago.

Resin

There is more than one way to read it. I read it as meaning the cultivars were going to be treated next.

Thanks for the responses. I thought DNA would show similarity among cell structure and would put an end to the discussionary 'treating' of placement among documentation folling the rules of "First-Named" gets the botanical designation followed by subspecies, etc -

Then again. Like Resin says, 'these unexplored places' might lend new information for placement of speices, sub species, etc - and we rely on fossil documentation all in this equation as well I'm thinking.

Like I said, it's a bit complicated for me to put any pieces of thought together and originally I too saw the potential of new discovery (Wollemmi came across my mind first) - therefore my "non original" realization that fossils too could have impact... not just the person who came across a "tree" and just named it. (therefore being cited in literature as the "founder" of that species.)

Put me on track with my current assumptions.

Please...

Thanks,

Dax

P.s. Actually I now see that fossil records really have no impact on how current literature is written. Just realized that. Later on.