---

Confused about this terminology:

Is Abrus pulchellus subsp. pulchellus equal Abrus pulchellus ?
Is Abrus pulchellus subsp. pulchellus equal Abrus pulchellus var. pulchellus ?

---

From the (perhaps) simplistic view of zoological nomenclature: Abrus pulchellus was described and later a 'var. tenuiflorus' was described. That would 'automatically' make the original var. the nominate var. When the var.'s were raised to subsp.'s the nominate var. became the nominate subsp. pulchellus. So, that would be the second option.

---

so I'm at this again. Certain author who knows his job , found both of those in certain area.

Vicia grandiflora
Vicia grandiflora subsp. grandiflora

if I put this into terms of car:

car red
car red subsp. red

What does this tell me ? both are car and both are read. But are they exact same model exact same colored ?

---

When you see "car red subsp. red" it is just more precise than "car red" and it also suggests that there might be another subsp. somewhere - like "car red subsp. blue" :)

---

that is then:
car red = car red subsp. red
infact, just runed into one real example of that:
http://www.ars-gr....pl?313996

although then strange why
Vicia grandiflora
Vicia grandiflora subsp. grandiflora
both on same list
here:
http://www.digita...k_jost.pdf

---

No ... "car red" is just not precise - it could mean "car red subsp. red" OR "car red subsp. blue", they just haven't said which sub-species it it :)

---

I agree with Chris. They just didn't discriminate between the subspecies /varieties and merely means s.l. Vicia grandiflora can mean s.l. (unknown which variety) or s.str. (V. grandiflora. var. grandiflora). If there is no addition to the species name then it is unknown which red car it is.