Talk:Panax pseudoginseng

What is this mean...???
http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=6758090 --222.67.213.124 (talk) 05:45, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Anyway, the clearification of the naming is needed

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&newwindow=1&q=allintitle%3A+Panax+pseudoginseng+Panax+ginseng&btnG=Search --222.67.213.124 (talk) 05:51, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

The naming system for this variety is very messy....
Only Panax pseudoginseng ssp. Japonicus exists in google scholar

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&newwindow=1&q=%22Panax+pseudoginseng+ssp%22&btnG=Search

Why is that???--222.67.206.72 (talk) 09:09, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Please compare the literature between IUPAC nomenclature and botanical nomenclature http://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_q=IUPAC+nomenclature&num=10&btnG=Search+Scholar&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_occt=title&as_sauthors=&as_publication=&as_ylo=&as_yhi=&as_allsubj=all&hl=en&lr=&newwindow=1

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&newwindow=1&q=allintitle%3A+botanic+nomenclature&btnG=Search

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&newwindow=1&q=allintitle%3A+botanical+nomenclature&btnG=Search --222.67.206.72 (talk) 09:23, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

If one browses the following, there are more than one code, such as Tokyo code and Vienna Code etc.... http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&newwindow=1&q=allintitle%3A+botanical+nomenclature+code&as_ylo=&as_yhi=&btnG=Search --222.67.206.72 (talk) 09:32, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Could someone please bring the naming info of this plant according to the above both code? --222.67.206.72 (talk) 09:34, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

and

the one from International Code of Botanical Nomenclature —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.67.206.72 (talk) 09:36, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

BTW, about the different codes http://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_q=Botanical+Nomenclature+St+Louis+Code&num=10&btnG=Search+Scholar&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_occt=title&as_sauthors=&as_publication=&as_ylo=&as_yhi=&as_allsubj=all&hl=en&lr=&newwindow=1 --222.67.206.72 (talk) 09:41, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&newwindow=1&q=allintitle%3A+Botanical+Nomenclature+Vienna+code&btnG=Search --222.67.206.72 (talk) 09:43, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=allintitle:+Botanical+Nomenclature+Tokyo+code&hl=en&lr=&newwindow=1&start=0&sa=N --222.67.206.72 (talk) 09:45, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&newwindow=1&q=allintitle%3A+Botanical+Nomenclature+Berlin+code&btnG=Search --222.67.206.72 (talk) 09:46, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&newwindow=1&q=allintitle%3A+Botanical+Nomenclature+Sydney+code&btnG=Search --222.67.206.72 (talk) 09:48, 9 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure what the issue being raised above is. The different editions of the botanical code don't change the rules all that much; it's highly unlikely that any changes in the code over the years would mandate a change in the name of this relatively well-known plant (rule changes in different editions of the code are more likely to bear on obscure names). Botanical nomenclature is confusing but any confusion regarding this plant has nothing to do with the codes. The recent Flora of China considers P. pseudoginseng and P. notoginseng to be different species; botanists may have previously considered these to be the same species (synonyms), but I'd be inclined to follow the Flora of China as an authoritative reference.Plantdrew (talk) 23:02, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Splitting Panax notoginseng
All of the content in this article, aside from the taxobox and the title itself, cover Panax notoginseng (or Panax in general). P. pseudoginseng is a distinct species. I'm moving the P. notoginseng content to that title. Plantdrew (talk) 04:29, 9 November 2013 (UTC)