hort.net Seasonal photo, (c) 2006 Christopher P. Lindsey, All Rights Reserved: do not copy
articles | gallery of plants | blog | tech blog | plant profiles | patents | mailing lists | top stories | links | shorturl service | tom clothier's archive0
Gallery of Plants
Tech Blog
Plant Profiles
Mailing Lists
    Search ALL lists
    Search help
    Subscription info
Top Stories
sHORTurl service
Tom Clothier's Archive
 Top Stories
New Trillium species discovered

Disease could hit Britain's trees hard

Ten of the best snowdrop cultivars

Plant protein database helps identify plant gene functions

Dendroclimatologists record history through trees

Potato beetle could be thwarted through gene manipulation

Hawaii expands coffee farm quarantine

Study explains flower petal loss

RSS story archive

Re: Colocasia

  • To: Multiple recipients of list AROID-L <aroid-l@mobot.org>
  • Subject: Re: Colocasia
  • From: StellrJ@aol.com
  • Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 10:05:37 -0600 (CST)
  • Content-Length: 762

In a message dated 2/16/01 9:18:13 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
ju-bo@email.msn.com writes:

<< but think
 that when you 'get into' the literature you will find that a lot if not most
 of the names used for the different forms/cultivars of this species are
 mostly 'informal'/unpublished names, and may number in the hundreds, >>

Well, I can say this.  Eduardo's original question was about subspecies 
(esculenta/antiquorum/aquatilis), and their classification based on tuber 
form.  Now we have gotten into cultivars, a completely different issue from 
subspecies.  No doubt, each subspecies has a number of cultivars; it would be 
interesting to see if any one subspecies has significantly more cultivars 
than the others.

Jason Hernandez

 © 1995-2017 Mallorn Computing, Inc.All Rights Reserved.
Our Privacy Statement
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index