Bromeliad Cultivar Register
InnovationsThe BCR is being constantly updated. For example did you know that Mulford B.Foster did not describe xQuesmea Lyman and thanks to Aussies and Marie Selby Botanical Gardens archives we now know what the plant looks like.
You will also note that we are using a BCR watermark on the larger photos. This is there to deter those who copy your photos and claim them as their own and for commercial purposes. These photos remain under the ownership of the photographer who sent us copies in the first place.
Version 1.1 (10-04-2013)
- A registration form has been included, with the possibility to upload one or more images. The registered name must be unique and must be approved by the Registrar, as well as the images (already implemented, but not yet activated - argument: register).
- A possibility to upload images in an existing BCR record has been included, but each image has to be approved by the Registrar before showing (already implemented, but not yet activated - argument: register).
- The layout has been changed to be centered like the main BSI web site and with the same background grid, to look more similar.
Version 1.02 (31-10-2011)
- Genus Index and Species indices, including letter icons to jump in the list
- Standard view for BCR records in the old PDF format, with thumbnails of the available images and Doc files
- A show possibility for images in larger size, including caption and watermark
- Backup in CSV (MSExcel) file format (Registrar Only)
- A general search box with some direction radio buttons
- A advanced search form (0.1)
- What's New button will give you the last 30 registrations (0.1.1)
- Genus list has been included in the database, so that the registrar can add new genera (1.01)
- bcrDocs paths has changed to work well from BSI subdomain (1.01)
- Main screen has changed, seems to be not logical that there were two home links (1.01)
- small bug solved with genus selection in advanced search (1.02)
To Do List
- For security: Bulk Download from the database will be blocked
- A registration form will be included, with the possibility to upload one or more images. The registered name must be unique and must be approved by the Registrar, as well as the images (already implemented, but not yet activated ?register)
- A possibility to upload images in an existing BCR record can be included, but each image has to be approved by the Registrar before showing (already implemented, but not yet activated ?register)
PhotographsThese may be copied for non-profit purposes such as educational or Newsletter material. They may not to be used for selling purposes such as ebay or published books but authority may be obtained from the quoted owner of the photo.
These are not considered the copyright of the BSI and are treated as being owned by the person lodging the photo with us. In the current version of this electronic Register we have allowed for the capture of this name. When an enquiry is made on a Cultivar name the response will show details plus photographs plus any articles written about such cultivar. If the photo is ‘clicked’ a large photo will be shown where the latest name will be displayed at the bottom plus detail of the original owner of the photo.
You will also see a WATERMARK that is there to help us reduce the volume of unauthorised copying of our photos!
A bit of historyAll photos lodged as at 31 Dec 2008 and incorporated in the new data-base are copies of the personal file of the retiring Registrar Derek Butcher.
Between 1980 and 1998 photographs or slides were lodged with each formal registration and supposedly held by the Registrar or Archivist in safe keeping. This is recommended by the ISHS. A Register is said to be an aid to Cultivar identification but if the only person to see the photographs was the Registrar, what worth were they to the Bromeliad growing public?
1998 saw the publication of the Bromeliad Cultivar Register but how good was it as an aid to Cultivar identification? With Don Beadle wanting to put the BCR on to a computer-based system readily accessible to the general public I was toying with the idea of accompanying it with photos. I already had a large file of photographs I had taken of Australian hybrids as I acquired them (The hybridists rarely did this job themselves!) I knew that Mike Andreas already had a photo file operating on fcbs.org. Here was a fantastic opportunity to have photos linked to an on-line data-base and so it came into being. The Registration form was amended to refer to photo images.
I slowly built up my personal file of jpegs that I kept purposely at about 50-100k each to save space and deter copying for personal printing purposes. I sent copies to Mike for him to post to the fcbs.org photo file. Meanwhile I was on the hunt for the photographs lodged with the BSI in the period 1980-1998 only to find that 90% had been lost or destroyed. Here, a few older BSI members did have personal photographs in similar fashion to myself and were prepared to share them with me. I won’t mention names because I might miss someone out but I am forever grateful for their help. I faced many problems in trying to convince old hybridists while they were living, that their old photographs were really worth something to others. For example, it will probably go down in history that James Elmore was a great volume hybridist and photographer. The family were so interested in arguing over who got the assets, the photographs became inaccessible and I only ever got 3 photos!
And so my photo file held in trust, grew and grew. It was copies from this file that were sent annually to the BSI Archivist . It was copies that were sent annually to the Kew Librarian so that the ISHS knew what we were doing. As I explained, we could print hardcopy in the form of thumbnail prints at any time to satisfy their requirement for registration but who would be responsible for holding 10,000 photos? We already cover their requirement that a Register must be published, by doing so at the biennial World Conferences. In 2008 we saw an abridged TOTAL file published.
A copy of my photo-file was forwarded on to Geoff Lawn who will hold it in trust for the next Registrar. Why are there so many copies? I felt there was a lesson to be learnt from the 90% loss of photos between 1980 and 1998.
Finally a word on copyright of photos. Only a few photo-images have been noted by the photographer as being copyright and this caption has been copied faithfully. Remember that the original photo would still be held by the sender, and only a copy sent to me to hold in trust. 99% of photos lodged were not named or identified and this was done by me in my own code to save space and time. Between 2000 and 2007 captions were added by Mike Andreas for the fcbs.org photo file because I did not have the software. Captions only occur in my file from 2007 onwards.
DUPLICATE NAMESWhen we were setting up this data base we realised there were many duplicate names (over 100!) and decided to do something about them. In many cases we combined the name of the hybridist AND the Cultivar name. For example if you search on Neoregelia Tiger you will get many answers. In the answers you will see Baker's Tiger and Skotak's Tiger, which shows which Tiger you may be searching for. We hope to stop duplicate names in the future but it is possible it can still happen especially with hybrids that have been in circulation for some years without being registered.
GROUPAccording to the ICNCP rules a Group is a formal category for assembling cultivars, individual plants or assemblages of plants on the basis of defined similarity. With Bromeliads there is a tendency toward giving cultivar names because of perceived differences within a species such as Aechmea chantinii so we have a group called Aechmea Chantinii Group. This can also include hybrids as long as they look like A. chantinii!
1. If you enter the word, Group in the Search area and press Search you will get a list of the Groups we have.
2. If you want to know the cultivar names within that group, go to Advanced Search and enter, for example, Chantinii Group in the section marked notes.
PLANT PATENTS, PLANT BREEDING RIGHTS, WHATEVER.by the Registrar 2003
The Bromeliad Cultivar Register published in 1998 showed reference to plant patents. Plant patents evolved to protect breeders from exploitation by others in an open market and act in a different way to what we call ‘Registration’. In no way can it be construed that reliance can be made on this plant patent reference NOR NON REFERENCE.
Plant names under plant patents will still be recorded in the Register when we know about them because the name will still apply in the future when the plant patent is obsolete. Secondly, it may help in reducing the use of duplicate names and the subsequent confusion in identification.
Plant patenting is a separate plant naming and identification system where there is NO direct contact with the ICRA and certain care should be taken if you are growing a plant which has a Plant Patent. Information received to date suggests you can safely grow on and take offsets from any named plant whether it has plant patents or not. The official wording seems to be you can grow patented plants for experimental purposes, privately and non-commercially. If you sell then you need to check with the Plant Patents authorities for the country (or area such as the European Union) in which you are going to sell. If you are going to sell in quantity we suggest you contact the hybridist by way of courtesy, in any case. Remember that asexual sports, like variegation, are also covered under the plant patent even though they would need a new name under the ICNCP rules. If it is your own hybrid then you have no worries even if one of the parents may be a patented plant. If you grow from self set seed from a patented plant you may also have to be wary depending on the country concerned.
Commercial growers of plants are well aware of these restrictions in selling plants, but how does it affect the back-yard grower and Plant Societies who organise plant sales? From what I can see, the onus is on the grower and not the Society unless the Society buys the plants for resale. Therefore, the grower is the one who should be checking for plant patents and you only need to check in the country where you are selling. Most have web sites where checking is easy although the one maintained in the USA is not user friendly. It is of interest that only a few bromeliads have current patents (or have applied for patents) on the various country’s websites I have checked. If in doubt you can always give away or swap any spare plants you may have. However, you have been warned of these dangers especially if you sell in bulk. Contact a Solicitor or Lawyer versed in Plant patents if you want advice.
Remember too that a plant label, that purports to be under plant patent for your Country and is not, would in all probability be in breach of the various Trade Practices Acts. Certainly in Australia a label giving a false impression about a plant patent is a punishable offence.
Registering of plants through an ICRA such as myself, is based on trust and keep those registrations rolling in. You can still use the information on the register as evidence to institute court action if someone were using your hybrid as their own. Plant Patents are based more on mistrust and you are advised to check before acting.