Re: Supervolute vernation vs. convolute

---

     I think these drawings do make sense of this. Philodendrons would be convolute, with a newly forming leaf inside of the opening leaf. Anthuriums would be supervolute, since they don't have that leaf inside the opening leaf. Antway, it is a fine distinction, and not that important for the average grower.

    But I have always watched out the involute anthuriums, the pachyneuriums, since they are not all birdnest types, and they usually breed with each other. I've made many crosses with heart shaped leaves crossed with linear leaved rosette types. I have had watermaliense cross with convolute/supervolute types like pedato-radiatum and dressleri. The leaves come out with a mix of involute and convolute. But I have never had a birdnest type cross outside of the pachynerium section, with a convolute type.

    So, I would guess that 99.999 percent of the anthurium 'hookeri' plants sold anywhere are definitely not hybrids of the true hookeri, since I doubt it could ever cross with pachyneriums. I hope to try some of these anyway, when my hookeri starts to flower.
    Thanks for starting this confusing topic, Steve. It's been fun!

Don Bittel

---

Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 10:17:17 -0600
From: Steve@exoticrainforest.com
To: aroid-l@gizmoworks.com; abri1973@wp.pl
Subject: [Aroid-l] Supervolute vernation. Finally a photo!

I screwed up big time and inserted the wrong drawing. 

These are the correct drawings from Stern's showing the placement of the midrib.  It appears the only difference in supervolute and convolute is a leaf forming around another leaf but frankly I still don't have a completely satisfactory explanation.  I try almost daily on my website to make subjects like this clearer for anyone interested in aroids that does not have or is not interested in earning a degree in botany.   I am now to the point of completely removing the subject since I am no longer sure I fully understand it or can help anyone else to understand. 

I don't believe any definition in print in any of the 5 botanical dictionaries I now own make the distinction (if any) between convolute and supervolute clear.  At least in the dictionaries they appear to be synonymous and are one and the same.

Steve
www.ExoticRainforest.com


Marek Argent wrote:

Steve,

 

We cannot talk about vernation types not seeing the midrib as it is presented on the second drawing.

It can as well be a half of a leaf rolled involutely.

 

The third drawing (convolute) is what I thought about (but I was afraid to say) -

that the term "convolute" may refer only to at least two objects

like one leaf inside another one or a spadix wrapped by a spathe.

 

Anyway in my cord photos, the third type, although probably not occuring in Araceae

is possible, so it must have a name too.

 

It's becoming complicated...

 

Marek

-

These drawings are from William T. Stern's Botanical Latin, 4th edition.