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
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

Unauthorized use of a plant doesn't invalidate it's patent

RSS story archive

[Aroid-l] Philodendron domesticum vs. Philodendron hastatum

  • Subject: [Aroid-l] Philodendron domesticum vs. Philodendron hastatum
  • From: "Steve Lucas Exotic Rainforest" <steve@exoticrainforest.com>
  • Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 08:57:40 -0600

If anyone has a documented photo of Philodendron domesticum G.S. Bunting I'd love to see the plant!  And I'd love to know where this species originated.
Some of you may recall our discussion last summer regarding "Philodendron glaucophyllum".  Many were not excited to read Dr. Croat's explanation that name is  fictitious and "made-up" name for Philodendron hastatum.  I corresponded with both Dr. Croat and Dr. Gonçalves at length regarding this Brazilian species.  During my search for  information I began to run across quite a few internet notations claiming Philodendron hastatum was "formerly known as" Philodendron domesticum.  Dr. Croat provided excellent reasoning why this is not possible.  P. hastatum was identified 112 years before P. domesticum therefore, assuming these were the same plant, P. hastatum would the name of preference and P. domesticum would be the synonym.  Still, many websites make a claim to the contrary.
In my internet description of the species I included their claims, which I still believe to be in error.  In doing so I listed the names of two websites that had made that claim.  I did not attempt to claim they were bad websites, quite the contrary, I described one as "an excellent" website.  That one was a large garden website and the other was a county extension agent.  But I've also found the claim on the USDA website and quite a few others!  Last week I received a letter from the garden website's attorney telling me to remove my claim they were in error or face legal action.  So I removed their name.  I didn't remove the facts provided by Dr. Croat that P. hastatum is the correct name.  I'm not sure if that is all they wanted done so we'll see if I actually get sued for claiming P. hastatum is the real name!
I cannot find much information on P. domesticum.  The photos on the internet (which cannot be verified) appear to be a totally different species.  If anyone has a verified photo of P. domesticum I'd love to see it!  I won't make the mistake of ever saying a large corporation is in error scientifically again on my site!  Apparently that particular site recently sold to a large magazine and it appears the new owner does not want to have their facts called into question.  But I won't change the correct name facts which appear to be scientifically accurate either!  The link to my page is attached.
Steve Lucas
Aroid-l mailing list

Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index

 © 1995-2015 Mallorn Computing, Inc.All Rights Reserved.
Our Privacy Statement