"Although they have always been thought to be similar, a difference in the stamens of the plants was held to be enough to view them as separate plant types.

However, this difference has now been found to be not significant enough to rule them as distinct."

Wouldn't it just be a party, to be sitting on the committees that decide what "significant" means??? I know they claimed they weren't "meddling for meddling's sake," but dang, it's hard to take assertions like this seriously.

Such fun! ;-) I just *love* needing to know 2 different botanical names for the same plant, lol. What do you think the chances are, of them changing it back, and really driving everyone nuts?

Can someone please educate me, too -- seeing as how I'm relatively new to this gardening stuff -- why the Royal Horticultural Society has the authority to make these proclamations? Is this worldwide?

I personally look for square hollow segmented stems and the distinctive flowers as a sign of salvia-ness. , now I need to squint really hard through a microscope to see DNA to see what constitutes true salvia-ness.

... and , yes, this name could change again and again. I have had the once Eupatorium havanense become Conoclinium havanense and , now it has parked itself at Ageratina havanense. It still looks like the same plant.

The scientist love to talk about the variability of common names for the reason to look down their collective noses at them. LOL, They should look in the mirror. I do like the scientific names, and I see their need but I sure wish they would stop changing them..

They do get all wrapped up in genius and families. I understand that they feel the need to have names reflect curren knowledge so I guess names will always be changing. It just that there are SO many changes,.... just like all our lives. Change has speeded up astronomically.

A friend sent me this podcast...Hybrids

It just that there are SO many changes,.... just like all our lives. Change has speeded up astronomically.

Resources can be distributed to leisurely pursuits during times of relative peace, I guess. :-/

I felt my first (minor) frustration with this issue, when I was researching natives. My HOA's approved list mentions Morella cerifera, so I go looking for it, and instantly stumble upon Myrica cerifera, and I'm like, "Oh, great." I had already accepted wackiness with common names (frequently reminding my husband, "Yeah, no, Wax Myrtle has no relation whatsoever with Crepe Myrtle. Totally different plants! I promise, the Wax is evergreen."), but I have higher expectations for botanical names and their consistency... longevity... finality, maybe I wanna say?

I don't know. But I share in the irritation. It's like, "Hey, you've named it. Unless it's some HUGE error, leave it be." lol

I believe Salvia officinalis is common sage. Salvia rosmarinus is rosemary. Lots of salvias. It's a big genus.

There have always been mistakes made in placing plants within genera. Some plants were mislabeled by breeders or importers. Visual clues were fine-tuned with microscopic inspection and genus/species names were often changed. Interactions of scientists studying plants eventually combined, split, or did away with original placements. Now genetics is making its pronouncements. The genomes of both living and dead DNA is being sequenced. DNA sequencing means "significant" is indeed finely defined.

Yes, it is annoying to look for Prairie Verbena under Verbena bipinnatifida and not be able to find it. It's still in the Verbena Family, but its genus is now Glandularia. Furthermore, even Family names are not always the same. Asteraceae is a Family name used by Lady Bird Johnson Wildflower Center. The Plant List uses the older but still valid Family name Compositae. At both sites Eupatorium havanensis is now Ageratina havanensis.