Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 22:06:27 -0500
Subject: Re: [Aroid-l] Philo ID
I`m certain that I speak for Leland when I say we are glad to try to help.
What we have to keep in mind when dealing with some of these plants which come to us from ''back in the old days'', is that we have no records of exactly where they originated, and what if any crosses might have been done back then by the old growers/producers, perhaps in attempts to create a plant with as much cold resistance as possible.
In the case of your photos, the squamules do look a lot like those of a ''pure'' P. bipinnatifidium, but the leaf blade in one of your photos does not demonstrate the number or depth of the divisions, nor the bipinnate nature of these divisions one would expect on a leaf of an adult, ''pure'' P. bipinnatifidium. This might only be an artifact of the age and size of the leaf in the photo. I suggest that you keep an eye on the plant in question and report if, as it matures and perhaps gets larger, the divisions do indeed deepen and ''split'', as we do know that juvinile plants of several species of Meconostigmas with split or divided leaves start off with leaf blades which are entirely cordate/sagittate, and only as they mature and increase in size do the distinctive divisions slowly develop.
I will keep my eyes open for what the squamules on obvious hybrids like P. evansii and P. eichlerii look like, and report back ''to base'', there is a plant at the Mounts Bot. Garden near to my home which I want to check into, and two groups up at Frenchman`s landing in Jupiter also.
I will keep us informed!
Thanks very much to Julius and Leland for your expert replies regarding and ID of the philodendron. The detailed explanations of possible ID are much appreciated.
Aroid-L mailing list