flower=floret -- NOT

[Jerrold Davis]

Pankaj:

A flower is most certainly NOT a floret.  This is a common misconception, 
but it isn't so.

A floret is a flower PLUS 1) lemma, 2) palea, 3) the axis on which the 
flower and these two bracts are borne, and 4) lodicules, depending on 
interpretation.  Many or most people interpret the lodicules as perianth 
parts, in which case they are part of the flower, but if they are 
interpreted as additional structures, rather than as part of the flower, 
they are an additional component of the floret.

Now, you can find some literature in which the lemma and palea are 
interpreted as modified floral parts, in which case the flower and floret 
would become identical or nearly identical in meaning, but this is an 
extremely unconventional interpretation.

Jerry


At 10:24 AM 7/20/2004 -0400, you wrote:

>Hi Everyone,
>
>As I was working on the monocot flower development part with Jen Clark
>from GO, we came up with a discussion point saying flower being
>equivalent to floret.
>https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=440764&aid=966600&group_id=36855
>
>So the question raised by Jen is why not just call it a synonym of
>flower. Also taking advantage of the PARTOF relationship which also
>means a child is a PART_OF but NOT_ALWAYS a PART_OF, we can have a
>structure like this for anatomy ontology
>
>flower; synonym:floret, floret (sensu Poaceae)
>-p-corolla
>---p-petal
>-p-calyx
>---p-sepal
>-p-tepal
>-p-lemma
>-p-palea
>-p-androecium
>---p-stamen
>-p-gynoecium
>---p-carpel
>
>This may help in retrieving instantiations of most of generic terms for
>  sensu poaceae.
>However how is it going to effect sensu Zea, I have to think about it.
>
>-Pankaj
>
>
>************************
>Pankaj Jaiswal, PhD
>G15-Bradfield Hall
>Dept. of Plant Breeding
>Cornell University
>Ithaca, NY-14853, USA
>
>Tel: +1-607-255-3103
>      +1-607-255-4109
>Fax: +1-607-255-6683
>http://www.gramene.org
>************************
>
>
>
>
>
>
>