If you search this site for ottos you might find a wonderful tree that a lady posted pics of a while back.
Pictures of plant going by second name. http://www.botanicalgarden.ubc.ca/forums/showthread.php?t=2575 Vertrees/Gregory mention 'Shigarami' being mis-called 'Saku'.
Re: new maple--No, just name games I second Ron. When I first saw listings on a popular auction site for these plants almost a year ago, I researched to find that 'Saku' was likely Shigarami. There is a large liner wholesaler that lists both of these plants in his catalog. The person selling the two plants you mention is also selling other "new" introductions from this particular grower's catalog. Likely liners that have come from Oregon. I didn't really care much for the idea that the name 'Saku' was used in selling that particular maple as it creates confusion--point proven in that you and I have both though it to be a new maple. I have the Otto's now and I doubtful that it will be the plant disscussed in this forum or the true form of Otto's that was once only outlet to a few people, but it is too soon to be sure. I don't like the name changes at all. I was caught off guard at a mail order nursery in Eugene, Oregon a few weeks back with a plant labled Tsuku shigata or something to that effect, where the name had been inappropriately chopped up in a way that was misleading. Only after saying it in my head did I realize the plant I was actually seeing.
An instance like that latter one is simply a matter of how a Japanese name is represented with Roman characters, 'Tsukushigata' vs. 'Tsuku Shigata'. It's not a name change, as in a paper being published where it is pointed out that an existing plant name won't do, and so forth. I wouldn't call a nursey using a wrong name for a plant that already has an accepted one a name change, either. I'd call that a mistake.
Ron, I don't agree with you. It is not simply a matter of how japanese characters are represented in Roman characters. If for many decades and through the 3 printings of Vertrees, the spelling has been represented at 'Tsukushigata'. In Maples for Gardens, Van Geldern has it spelled 'Tsukushi gata'. Being a simple collector and neophyte in the nomemclature of plants I do not fully understand how names are approved and assembled, but I can say with some certainty that I suspect there is no basis in Japanese nomenclature to divided the name 'Tsukushigata'. And I have have read correctly before, the code of nomenclature prohibits the change of a cultivar name. I guess it is a matter of how that is interpreted. You point out the the two part name is not a name change, but I disagree. Dividing the name gives the impression that some new knowledge has come to light about the plant and there is some reason for alterting the name. The only reason to ever do this would be if it was decided that the two plants were different and then the name would need to be different not simply divided. Any change in a cultivar name creates the possilbity of confusion and can be construed as a negligent or intentional effort to mislead anyone purchasing the plant, hoping that they will believe it to be a distinct variety. Ron, why do you think many of the names of maples are being altered? I honestly do not know the answer, but it is happening at the fastest rate in Europe. Is Gregory's new text going finally snub out all of the names that Vertrees worked so hard to sort out. Are the names Vertrees listed in his frist two texts invalid? Why is it that Yano often uses both spellings, on one page listing the traditional spellings and on another listing the European spellings? Surely one must be correct. He should know better than the Van Gelderns, correct? I know that this seen as an insignificant topic by many, but when we can't even identify our maples in many cases, the last thing that people should be doing is screwing with the names, or at least screwing with the Japanese names as the newer names are a different issue entirely.
"With the added assistance of Mr. Hisao Nakajima, an expert on Japanese maples who was also of great help in providing information on the correct separation of names into individual words, we have restudied Japanese cultivar names in relation to the original characters to suggest meaningful divisions..." - Maples for Gardens, pp. 20-21
My mistake Ron. I guess everyone has their own experts. I thought that the first two Vertrees texts were were compiled using not only "experts" from Japan but additionally or primarily they were derived from catalogs of plants and Japanese manuscripts. I just give more weight to the Vertrees texts. But again, what does it matter if it only matters to me. Everyone seems indifferent to the name alterations and accepting, so I am done with this off-topic topic. What basis do I have for my opinions anyway, they are just that. Call it Tsuku shigata, Tsukushi gata, Tsukushigata, or what ever you want. I can sort things out for myself. Back to the thread topic: is Saku synomous to Shigarami? Is it different? or is it related, maybe a seedling or variety of it. If it is closely realted, say a seedling and people are going to sell it as both names, then souldn't it get the parent plant desigation, Shigarami or Shigarami seedling?
I thought that the first two Vertrees texts were were compiled using not only "experts" from Japan but additionally or primarily they were derived from catalogs of plants and Japanese manuscripts. I just give more weight to the Vertrees texts. The common name spellings had their origin in Japan. There was a committee that approved the names that Mr. Vertrees used. Not only did the people in Japan supply the common name spellings to Mr. Vertrees and others but they did also conform to a couple of the Maples of the World books written by Japanese botanists and another manuscript that came from a paleobotanist written in kanji on rice paper and bound together with bamboo. The books above were translated into English later and did give many of the spellings their original basis to fall back on. The precedent set in Europe was established in England first and soon later with the van Gelderen et all Maples of the World book that used many of the same spellings J.D. did for his books that were translated et all from the old kanji. But again, what does it matter if it only matters to me. Everyone seems indifferent to the name alterations and accepting, so I am done with this off-topic topic. What basis do I have for my opinions anyway, they are just that. Call it Tsuku shigata, Tsukushi gata, Tsukushigata, or what ever you want. I can sort things out for myself. It does matter as most people would not be able to determine on their own, upon visual inspection, that the Tsuku shigata and the Tsukushigata as seen in a nursery in Eugene, Oregon, for example, are the same plant. If the plants came from different sources and they have in recent years, they can indeed look different from each other and that is part of the problem that the new abbreviated, hyphenated in some circles in the UK and spaced spellings have created to which the people behind the misspellings have not made themselves accountable yet to the old guard in Maples for their actions. In defense of them, they did not know how they came about and who all was involved in the common name spellings years previous and did not have access to the old books either but there was a prominent individual in England that knew about everything that went on with the common name spellings. The new common name spellings have no historical basis to fall back on in regards to and in relation with Japanese Maples. This little guy has orange spring and new growth. Who is calling their Maple Saku orange? The Saku Maple does exist and it is similar yet different than Shigarami. The Wada form of Shigarami has leaves about half the size of Tana, with small, dainty leaves in comparison. Also, the tips of the lobes of Saku are not purple like the Wada form is before Shigarami goes from purple to a magenta color in the tips of the lobes as the year progresses. I will have to reserve judgement on Saku until I can see some photos of it. Jim
Hi all, I will chime in here. It *is* important to keep the Japanese names of maples correct to avoid confusion, but also to preserve the original meaning of that name as it can be descriptive of the tree just like common English names of plants are. Many Japanese words are made up of two words that are combined which if separated take on a new meaning entirely. Take my surname for instance, "Uyeno" (which ironically is misspelled in English!). "Uye" or rather correctly "Ue" (pronounced oo-weh) means "above, over, on top of, up, upper part, summit" depending how you use it. And "no" means "field or meadow". Translated my surname means "above the field" or "over the field". Now, if some one were to come along and separate my name into two words it may not conjure up the same meaning, especially if you were Japanese and reading it separated in kanji. Let's use an English name as an example. If I went around labeling my Acer palmatum Butterfly as "Acer palmatum Butter fly" it would take on a whole different meaning now wouldn't it? Reading "Butterfly" conjures up an image of an insect with pretty wings fluttering from flower to flower sipping on nectar. Whereas "Butter fly" conjures up an image of a stick of butter flying in the air!" See my point? I'm sure if I separated the "butter" and the "fly" a lot of people would be writing to correct me. With regard to Mr. Nakajima (or is it Naka jima?): I'm sure he is very knowledgeable and well respected regarding Japanese maples, but what is his grasp of the English language? Just because a Japanese person spells a Japanese word a certain way in English doesn't make it correct in *English*. I've stated before that one can not always rely on the English spelling of Japanese named maples on Japanese websites. Simply go to Engrish.com and after you're done laughing your head off you'll understand what I'm talking about. Translation is always difficult. In order to do it well one must have a firm grasp of *both* languages. A Japanese translator needs to understand all the quirkiness of the English language such as words that are spelled similarly yet have entirely different meanings and pronunciation...like bomb, tomb, and comb. Or, sound the same but have different spellings and meanings...like there, their and they're. The same also holds true for Japanese words and characters. Vertrees took great pains to get the names as correct as can be. He used several different Japanese experts as consultants and, as he admits, even they disagreed sometimes. Why? Just like the English language the Japanese language changes and evolves. Words, phrases and spellings that were used 300 years ago are sometimes not used anymore. Much in the same way Shakespeare can seem like a foreign language to many of us who speak English! Okay, well, 'nuff said. I'll go back to my corner now.... Layne
It was the Japanese in Japan that felt that more than one translation be made for the common name spellings. Actually, the committee did the work for a lot of people for years to come just to have their work trashed by people that want to make up stuff mainly because they do not know or do not want to know their Maples. Even people that have sold Tsukushigata in the past should know that Tsuku shigata is the same plant as the one they have sold for over 10-15 years. It irritates me to see this stuff happening as one or more of you out there in cyberland will buy both Maples feeling you have two different plants. It is that notion is what bothers me the most in that the original Maple has been diluted to the point that the grower of the new named Maple is banking on none of you knowing what the actual plant looks like. In event you buy the Maple on impulse just like many people do with some of the mixed up and changed names from one online auction host. Itami nishiki is a Maple that as Michael has written about in this forum has been offered for auction as three names, all are the same Maple but who else knows that? If you are someone I like then ask me and I'll tell you but if the seller learns of my involvement of you not buying the plant then I am the bad guy. One of the reasons I do not like to come right out and tell people what their Maple is, is because I want them to study and learn their plant, then when they are ready to know what their Maple is I'll tell them and from then on it is my hope that they will not be fooled on that Maple, like so many of you have been, again. Every time I see a Maple in the photo gallery that is not the plant I learned it to be I cringe big time as it is not just one person that bought that Maple as being something it isn't, there will be others that will buy the plant also. I have deferred in writing that people are better off to buy the Maple because they like it and want to own it but so many people to this day and beyond buy the plant not so much because they like it but because of the name on the tag. There are a host of growers around that want you to buy the name on the tag rather than the plant. Why, because there is money in it for them. I truly feel that the growers that have purposely misnamed their Maples and have changed the names around should be exposed for all to know their game as we had to do in antique art glass in which people have sold fake pieces that cost them $300 and sold them for $30,000 to the people that did not know their glass. That may be extreme in dollars in comparison to Maples but the intent was to deceive and hope that the buyer is flat out stupid. We do have growers that are banking on people that are just that. What makes things much worse as far as I am concerned are the buddies of the growers that will not tell on their buds which makes the crime even more pronounced and even more distasteful to me. Who is worse, the person that is only wanting the money or the people that know better and will not say a word all because the fraudulent person is one of their friends? I choose the latter and have a much greater disdain for those people. All of us purists felt the same way about them. It used to be that we could isolate the grower that was misrepresenting his or her plants but we cannot have an effect with the people that will give the act of known misrepresentation credence. I agree with Ron though that many of the mistakes in the names in the past were indeed honest mistakes but today those same mistakes are magnified in that did the grower make an honest mistake or was it done on purpose. In today's world the latter is more true. Thank you Layne for your comments. One thing the venerable books out of Japan also referenced were names of Maples that Mr. Vertrees had no choice but to call synonym names of other Maples. The name Saku applies in this case as the Saku Maple is different than a Shigarami. I am not going to go into detail about how they are different from each other but I will state right here and now that there is no Maple called Saku orange that I know of. I believe the orange refers to the newest growth coloring and the typical Fall colors for the Saku Maple. I saw what I needed to see in an online auction photo that confirmed my suspicions. I am now done on this Maple for now and perhaps later as well until I see some photos of a bona fide stock plant. Jim
