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

Re: [Aroid-l] Philodendron 'Santa Leopoldina'

  • Subject: Re: [Aroid-l] Philodendron 'Santa Leopoldina'
  • From: <plantguy@zoominternet.net>
  • Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 16:48:46 -0500

Well, I have been following this thread with some interest although I have never grown a Philo. in my life.  In spite of my monumental ignorance of the genus I finally have gotten up the nerve to ask a completely silly question.  I have only heard people talking about the leaf of these plants, the rate at which they grow, color of top and bottom of leaf, etc, but surely a proper ID can not be made for this plant, or this genus I would have thought, based on leaf form and color can it??  The pictures being posted are incredibly beautiful and the difference between juvenile and adult leaf forms is intrigueing, but truly points out the difficulty of relying on these features for an ID.  I have not read of anyone describing the "naughty bits" as Wilbert refers to them for his favorite genus.  Does the Philo. world not rely upon the reproductive bits in the influorescence for a proper ID??   If so, then it would seem that proper IDs would be possible for anyone that has flowered their plant.  Are these almost impossible to flower thus adding to the difficulty??  Also, I would assume that someone is doing the proper DNA work-up on these plants so that a completely unequivocal ID can be had by anyone that wants to submit and pay for genotyping, but perhaps not??
I apologize for the questions of an outsider in this rather exciting conversation, but I hope that perhaps I can learn a little bit along the way and perhaps someday I will even have a Philo. of my own....any old Philo.  Please be gentle in your responses :o)
Gibsonia, PA
zone 6a, where Spring is hopefully just around the corner :o)
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 2:33 PM
Subject: [Aroid-l] Philodendron 'Santa Leopoldina'


OK. So how reliable are the reports of the remaining P. spiritu-sancti in the wild? What distinguishing marks should we be looking for? I have been looking at the pictures in the postings and they vary quite a bit. How do I know a real one when I see it? On what basis do the searchers in Brazil make their determinations? Maybe the only plants left are examples of one or another of the sham plants.


Aroid-l mailing list
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