|Dear Don and All,|
According to recent posts and the literature about Anthurium section Pachyneurium, all(?) of the birdnest forms, except Anthurium hookeri, are Pachyneurium with involute vernation. I have this birdnest form Anthurium...photo files attached, that has supervolute vernation. It has very spicy, fragrant inflorescences. There is a long, naked stipe. Note the peduncle, old spathe attachment area, naked stipe, and inflorescence. Does anyone else grow this thing and does anyone have a name or data?
--- On Wed, 1/20/10, Don Bittel <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: [Aroid-l] Supervolute vernation vs. convolute
To: "Discussion of aroids" <email@example.com>
Date: Wednesday, January 20, 2010, 7:03 PM
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!
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 10:17:17 -0600
To: firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com
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.
Marek Argent wrote:
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
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
It's becoming complicated...
These drawings are from William T. Stern's Botanical Latin,
Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service. Get it now.
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----