This website is derived from the Dutch version and intended to provide the internal community of batologists with information about issues that go beyond the direct interest of Rubus research in the Netherlands. The button 'Taxa' gives a list of Rubus species in the Netherlands. For pictures you can use the Dutch version. We will provide in the future descriptions of at least those species that are (semi-)endemic and whereof no English description is available.

The button 'Revision and Debate' gives also an alphabetical list of species and other taxa. Here recent revisions, corrections or discussions on these taxa are displayed.

Under the button 'News' general information is given and you will also be informed about recent additions and changes that are presented on the website.

As for nomenclature we keep to the ICN. Precisely because Rubus is such a contested genus we should not make an exception in nomenclature. We must not take our own track but join the international community of botanists and keep to the decisions of the botanical congress.

My policy in this field is to save, if anyway possible under the rules, the classic names of Weihe, Focke and Sudre, because much literature is in line with these, and even more important: most collections are arranged according to these names. In case an author includes in the synonymy an older name, one must consider twice why he did so before concluding that the new name is a nomen superfluum. Is there any reason why the other name is quoted without meaning identity with the type? Only if one cannot but conclude that the type is included (e.g. R. tomentosus Borkh. where the author rejects the older synomym because the name should be inapt) one must consider the new name as illegitimate.

If names are clearly against the rules these must be changed. In case of very common names, and especially the diploid species that are often burdened by many infraspicific taxa,  it is required to make a proposal for conservation. If these situations occur, I propose to indicate that a proposal for conservation will be prepared and as long as this is not effectuated to keep to the names in common use. After a proposal is accepted we will, of course, keep to it, and we will follow also the decision if it is rejected. This procedure fits to the ICN. I only propose to consider an announcement of an intended proposal for conservation as a sign not to change names is current use.