FW: Survey of common tree names

[Beth Lynch]

This is precisely the point.  We are LOOKING for trees whose names differ
in different parts of the US.  We want to know whether people are likely to
think trees are more similar if they share names.  This is the question of
a  psychologist rather than a botonist.  But perhaps with our results you
will be BETTER able to convince your classes because you will have
scientific evidence that using common names can confuse them and make them
focus on irrelevant similarities.

>I concur. The common name "pigweed" is applied to Amaranthus in some parts
>of the US, Chenopodium in others, Portulaca in others. I frequently use this
>example in class to illustrate the importance of using scientific names.
>Joseph E. Laferriere
>Biosphere 2
>P.O. Box 689
>Oracle AZ 85623 USA
>joseph at bio2.com
> ----------
>From: owner-taxacom
>To: Multiple recipients of list TAXACOM
>Subject: Re: Survey of common tree names
>Date: Friday 02 June 1995 8:44AM
>
>One thing you need to keep in mind is the nomenclatural baggage we all
>carry with us.  If we grew up in one part of the country, but now live
>elsewhere, the names we provide may not be the same as those a local
>native would provide.  For example, I know Quercus ellipsoidalis well
>from the area of its range where it is roughly sympatric with Quercus
>palustris.  The former I call northern pin oak, the latter pin oak.
>However, many of my colleagues in northern Wisconsin/Northern
>Michigan/Minnesota, where the latter does not occur, call the former
>simply pin oak.  My point is, if I had moved there from here, the name I
>use would not necessarily match the local name.  Thus, you need some way
>to control for the geographic origins of those reporting the names.
>
>Richard J. Jensen      |   E-MAIL: rjensen at saintmarys.edu
>Dept. of Biology       |   TELEPHONE: 219-284-4674
>Saint Mary's College   |   FAX: 219-284-4716
>Notre Dame, IN  46556  |