David Hershey wrote:
>I like the terms dioecious and monoecious, however the problem is
>that there is no companion term for the third and most prevalent
>possibility, i.e.
>I. Unisexual flowers or cones
> A. On same plant - monoecious (about 7% of seed plants)
> B. On separate plants - dioecious (about 4% of seed plants)
>II. Bisexual flowers - ?? (about 89% of seed plants)
There is a companion term - synoecious - for plants with bisexual
flowers. Admittedly it's not used much but I can reference some
taxonomy texts that supply it. Now you didn't really think that there was
a term lacking from the botanical lexicon, did you? ;)
Linda
======================================================================
Linda A. Raubeson (509) 963-2734 (phone)
Department of Biological Sciences (509) 963-2730 (fax)
Central Washington University raubeson at tahoma.cwu.edu
Ellensburg, WA 98926-7537
=====================================================================
