7. On the priority of "Genistion purgantis" Tüxen in Tüxen & Oberdorfer 1958 and "Senecioni-Genistetum purgantis" Tüxen & Oberdorfer 1958

In a recent review of which we were co-authors (Rivas-Martínez, Belmonte, Cantó, Fernández-González, Fuente, Moreno, Sánchez-Mata & Sancho, Lazaroa 7: 93-124. 1987), rejection of names Genistion purgantis Túxen in Túxen & Oberdorfer 1958 [Veróff. Geobot. Inst. Rúbel Zúrich 32: 228] and Senecio tournefortii-Genistapurgans Ass. Túxen & Oberdorfer 1958 [op. cit.: 229-230] versus Pino-Cytision purgantis Rivas-Martínez 1964 [Anales lnst. Bot. Cavanilles 22: 358] and Junipero nanae-Sarothamnetum purgantis Rivas-Martínez 1963 [Anales Inst. Bot. Cavanilles 21(1): 172-186] respectively, was proposed and adopted.

Art, biology and technology. Interdisciplinary relations in the science lab

Bio art, understood as the convergence of the relations between art, biology and technology, constitutes a useful case study to discuss the meaning of interdisciplinarity in the artistic field. This paper explores different discourses around interdisciplinarity in order to challenge certain generic approaches for their ineffectiveness when assessing artistic practices. It is proposed that the analysis of interdisciplinarity must address the singular connections produced in the artistic practice itself, considering the impossibility of reducing the complexity of interdisciplinary dialogues into generic considerations. Taking bioart as a case study, different kinds of relationships between the artist and the lab are identified and analyzed, ranging from the use of the lab as a true atelier and as a resource for materials and techniques, to the rejection of the lab by proposing amateurism as an alternative. estrategias amateur, pasando por su utilización como fuente de técnicas y materiales.