Question and answer

 

The references are barely posted and already the main criticism relates to the following specific topic. (Identity of enquirer has been hidden).

Q. Looks like we have sold out to AI don’t we ?

A. It may look like it but it is far from the reality. I have always stated that AI is not doing a decent job in botanical nomenclature. This does not prevent me from using its online capabilities. I am sometimes pleasantly surprised by the depth of backgound given on some specific botanical topics. Finding a common name to match a scientific name, AI can mostly handle, but pairing a common name with another in a different language is often a disaster. This is explained by the facts that generally sites (or books) dealing with “Botany” neglect the vernacular. Similarly when common names are the focus, the taxonomy is poor or ignored altogether. There are exceptions but not enough of them for AI to exploit.

This is where the “hortibloke” becomes useful by matching the vernacular and science with his “sorting” of names.

A recent flood of enquiries of mine to AI has highlighted another of its weaknesses. Some languages such as Azerbaijani for instance have few online resources, especially botanical texts. This makes AI task difficult.

To complicate matters further, when in its Perso-Arabic script (Azerbaijani Arabic) form, the vocabulary is confused with Persian by translating devices. This is understandable given the closeness of the “two” languages with only regional differences. This is reminiscent of the various languages based on Malay. These  linguistic distinctions are especially important if plant names have to be precisely matched to botanical names.

Q. Why don’t you have anything on avocado, fig etc. Things that are commonly grown ?

 

A. My first answer would be “fair dinkum mate” there are millions of edible plants to cover. Together with their wild relatives, which need to be treated, we are looking at trillions of plants. There is only one person to do the job. Not a robot able to brass giga bits of data. 

All you have to do is post a request and I’ll get going on Avocados, Figs and others as soon as time permits.

The second answer less positive perhaps, is that since I started these updates two years ago it has appeared that the taxonomy shifted a little too much in general. At the same time the taxonomy below the specific level has been neglected by taxonomists. This is in part due to a tendency to reduce the number of species. I recall the outrageous reduction of hundreds of Citrus varieties to less than half a dozen. 

In this context it is sometimes too difficult to deal with cultivar names and cultivar groups. This is the basic information that the horticultural community  needs to know.