Re: Alocasia reversa
Hmmm, interesting. Dewey, what's the answer? It was your reversa that I
photographed and listed on the web page. (And perhaps it's now time for a
public admission that I killed it over the winter.)
On the other hand, Kris, after looking at your photos, I bet they're the
same plant and that mine was just a lot younger and so had leaves that were
slightly different shaped. Unfortunately, it died before I was able to
At 02:57 PM 8/22/98 -0500, you wrote:
>> Dear Krzysztof,
>> `Really pretty Alocasia' looks like a non-peltate form of A. reversa
>I have more photos of this plant at
>http://u1.netgate.net/~kk/Araceae/Alocasia/reversa.html, including a recent
>Actually, there are both peltate and non-peltate laves on the same plant!
>juvenile leaves are very much peltate, the later two are defnitely
>the main posterior veins are exposed for at least 1/2 inch away from the
>I looked also at Lester Kallus' photos of A.reversa at
>http://www.kallus.com/aroids/alocasia/areversa.htm, and I suspect one of our
>is not what it is labeled as (or is this a highly variable species?).
>Alistair, would you have time to take another look at these pages? The
>inflorescence photos should show at about 2x magnification on typical
>monitors (the actual size is 2" from the bottom of the spathe to the tip
>spadix), so they should be more helpful in confirming its identity...
>"Applying computer technology is simply finding the right wrench to
> pound in the correct screw."
Other Mailing lists |
Author Index |
Date Index |
Subject Index |