Thanks for providing this documentation. However, reviewing it has left me with more questions than answers as to why you think that the term cultivar should be so vigorously defended. First, I note the following;
Formal definitionMain article: International Code of Nomenclature for Cultivated Plants
The Cultivated Plant Code notes that the word cultivar is used in two different senses: first, as a "classification category" the cultivar is defined in Article 2 of the International Code of Nomenclature for Cultivated Plants (2009, 8th edition) as follows: The basic category of cultivated plants whose nomenclature is governed by this Code is the cultivar.[18] There are two other classification categories for cultigens, the grex[19] and the group.[20] The Code then defines a cultivar as a "taxonomic unit within the classification category of cultivar". This is the sense of cultivar that is most generally understood and which is used as a general definition.
A cultivar is an assemblage of plants that (a) has been selected for a particular character or combination of characters, (b) is distinct, uniform and stable in those characters, and (c) when propagated by appropriate means, retains those characters.
Your link is broken by adding the word "by" to the hyperlink, however removing the "by" from the hyperlink you get:
THREE DECADES OF DURIAN BREEDING PROGRAM IN THAILAND AND ITS THREE NEWLY RECOMMENDED F1 HYBRIDS
Authors: S. Somsri, S. Vichitrananda, P. Kengkat, P. Koonjanthuk, S. Chunchim, S. Sesuma, S. Jintanawongse, S. Salakphet
Keywords: D. zibethinus, recommended F1 hybrids, interspecific hybrids
Abstract:
Durian breeding program was conducted in Thailand by using conventional breeding procedures. Durian germplasm was surveyed and collected from various horticultural research centers of the Department of Agriculture, such as Chanthaburi, Surat Thani, Trang and Yala Horticultural Research Centers (HRC) between 1956 and 2000. Characterization and evaluation were investigated by using morphological and DNA fingerprinting. Clonal selection of existing commercial cultivars namely: 'Mon Thong', 'Chani', 'Kan Yao', 'Kradum Thong' and chance-seedling trees was conducted between 1986-1988 at Chanthaburi HRC, by means of quality contest. The three selected trees based on their specific characters were released and distributed to the farmers. At the Chanthaburi HRC, at least 68 cultivars were collected, characterized and evaluated. Eighteen cultivars were selected to be parental plants for 55 reciprocal crosses and produced 7,634 F1 hybrids seedlings between 1986 and 1990. During 1999 to 2006, some of these F1 hybrids were characterized and evaluated on 26 characters; however only five characters (fruit weight, percentage of flesh, aborted seed, flesh thickness and eating quality) were the main criteria for F1 selection along with early, moderate, late maturity, percentage of fruit setting and yield. The variation of F1 hybrids was investigated and also, the Thai Durian standard (1998) was applied to use for selection. The 29 promising F1 hybrids were confirmed for their quality at least three years and compared with the commercial variety for seven years. The first three promising lines were selected to be new recommended F1 hybrid cultivars, namely, 'Chanthaburi 1', '2' and '3'. The DNA fingerprinting for these promising lines was studied to identify their specific characters or banding patterns. Also, 253 selved promising lines of F2 generation, 4,278 F1 lines from 51 new crosses between 1998 and 2002, 110 interspecific hybrids from 45 crosses between 1988 and 1992 and 21 crosses in 2000 are being investigated to produce new F1 hybrids with high tolerance to Phytophthora palmivora, high quality, yield and varying fruit quality and size to meet the requirements of the consumers
Without reading the entire article, it seems to me that they took existing cultivars and used them to develop new F1 hybrids. They came up with new hybrids with I presume their own cultivar names and distributed them to farmers. That doesn't mean that the trees that they used in their analysis to obtain the parentage of the new hybrids were cultivars as you seem to want to define them. Reference is made to having contests to see which ones people liked the best. Then the selected ones were used in the breeding program. Do you think that the fruit/trees they collected to begin breeding process were "real cultivars" as you want to define them? Seems to me that what was done was a gathering of the existing commercial and other "cultivars" as they called them and then they began a process to properly ID and analyze these for future breeding purpose. I am thinking that you would not want to call the original collection of durian plant material "cultivars" and would reserve that term for only the new hybrids they distributed. Am I correct?
The actual definition of the term cultivar, which I understand is a combination of the terms cultigen and variety, seems to be pretty broad and somewhat forgiving. I am not saying a first fruit from a backyard should be immediately entitled to "cultivar" status......but I am equally of the opinion that people much smarter and involved in the horticutural world than I am are using the term "cultivar" with considerably greater laxity than you would like.
