Talk:Scots pine

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The erroneous spelling "Scotch pine" is also occasionally seen, but should be avoided as it is considered offensive in Scotland

I'm not trying to be offensive, but I don't think I'd ever seen it call anything BUT "Scotch pine" (and it's sold as a fairly common Christmas tree here in the US). I might even go so far as to say that "Scotch Pine" was the usual spelling in the States. Dukeofomnium 13:54, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)

There seems to be a making of a revert war here, which is a pity. I'd like to try and reach a compromise here that everyone can be happy with. Namely:

  1. MPF's range description is more grammatical. I'm not sure what "pockets in radius out from it's central density" means. Can this be rewritten to be more clear?
Sorry, they don't. Life forms expand ranges where conditions become suitable for them with changing conditions (e.g. post-glacial climate warming), and die out where conditions become unsuitable. The map shows the current distribution, much of which was under 3km thickness of ice 20,000 years ago. The range then was in a different area of Europe and Asia. MPF
  1. I found a citation [1] that says that P. s. lapponica is deprecated.
You will notice that I did not list var. nevadensis as an accepted variety. But the published genetic evidence (cited below) for the acceptance is strong, unlike that for var. lapponica, for which there is published evidence (also cited below) to support its inclusion in typical var. sylvestris.
  1. The sentences about people in Wisconsin disliking Scots pine and the use of the term European Redwood seems quite POV. I could spend effort to rewrite, but I'd like to see some evidence before I do so.
No such attempt exists. "Redwood" simply means a tree with wood coloured red, which does apply to some individual Scots pine trees. The first attested reference to redwood dates to 1634, nearly 200 years before the Californian redwoods were first discovered. It was your idea to mention redwood on this page in the first place; I saw no point in including reference to an obsolete term that is very little used in modern English for Scots pine. 'Redwood' in modern British tree books always refers to the American and Chinese species, and is identical to American usage. MPF 00:00, 7 Apr 2004 (UTC)

-- hike395 05:29, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Hi Hike, Agreed; I don't consider the listing of P. sylvestris var. lapponica as a synonym is worth listing, as the implication is that one would also need to list the other 100-120 named synonyms as well. - MPF 12:43, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)

See referenced notes below. - MPF 21:50, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Moved Discussion from Vandalism in Progress

  • Pine and Scots pine - User:Kenneth Alan persists in adding unsupported and POV remarks about claimed name etymologies which have no basis in any dictionary. The same user has been widely criticised on numerous other pages for similar reasons - MPF 13:07, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)

User:Kenneth Alan claims at pine (now transferred to talk:pine; bold text in dispute): The modern English name pine derives from Latin Pinus by way of French pin, meaning needle. In the past (pre-19th century) they were always known as fir in English, from Old Norse fura, and Old English furh by way of Middle English firre. The Old Norse/Old English name is still used for pines in some modern North European languages: in Danish, fyr, in Nowegian, furu, and in Northern Germany, Föhre. British English speakers refer to it as fir but in American English, "fir" is now restricted to Abies and Pseudotsuga. Other unrelated European names include German Kiefer (the most widely used name in Germany) and Tanne(tannin), Swedish tall(from deal), Dutch den(tannin), Finnish mänty, Russian sosna and Bulgarian and Serbo-Croat bor.

(1) French pin does not mean "needle", it is derived directly from Latin pinus, itself probably derived from Greek pitys (pine; resin). The word "pin" as in pins & needles is derived from Latin pinna, a feather, and is wholly unrelated.

(2) British English speakers refer to Pinus as pine, not fir. This has been the case for at least 250 years. There is no difference between British and American usage of pine and fir.

(3) Deal derives from Old High German dilla (plank, board), and is not related to Swedish tall for pine.

(4) Tannin derives from tannatus, thought to be of Celtic origin, and is not related to Dutch den for pine.

Sources: Oxford English Dictionary; Dallimore & Jackson, Handbook of Coniferae; W J Bean, Trees & shrubs hardy in the British Isles; Royal Horticultural Society Dictionary of Gardening; P Miller, Gardener's Dictionary (1731, a standard eighteenth century British reference book on plants; uses pine for Pinus).

Etymology is a well-researched science, and the results of this research are widely presented in many dictionaries. The above results of one person's uncorroborated ideas have no place in Wikipedia. - MPF 20:54, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)

To the above paragraph by K Alan:

"he removed variety lapponica(Lappland pines are stunted by the tundra environment)"
Environmental effects do not make a taxon. This purported taxon was clearly demonstrated not to be a genuine distinct taxon by O. Langlet (1959), A cline or not a cline: a question of Scots pine, Silvae Genetica 8: 13-22. This research paper has been widely accepted by subsequent authors, including K I Christensen in Flora Nordica, the standard treatment of Scandinavian plants.

"but added the variety nevadensis(Sierra Nevada has a treeline with alpine vegetation and not trees)"
The Sierra Nevada does have a tree-line, and it is occupied, among other trees, by a disjunct population of Scots pine. Some genetic research (W Prus-Glowacki & B R Stephan 1994, Genetic variation of Pinus sylvestris from Spain in relation to other European populations, Silvae Genetica 43: 7-14) strongly supports that this population is distinct; further research is continuing and may well result in the widespread recognition of this taxon.

"He added Mongolian pine as a valid widely known name for Pinus sylvestris when in fact that term is restricted to the variety mongolica"
And clearly stated that it refers to this variety.

"His POV attitudes have removed Tallväxter from the Swedish link, which in fact is the modern name for the Pine family in Sweden. Tall is the modern Swedish name for Scots pine"
The current Swedish page is at http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tall. The page http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tallväxter is currently empty. I would have no objection to leaving that link, if it led anywhere. While no entry exists there, the link is better pointing at the extant article. Though equally, Tallväxter refers to the pine family (Pinaceae), not the pine genus (Pinus) where KA would have it link.

- MPF 20:54, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)