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: Tuber vs. Corm

First of all how do you define a corm, did you mean the botanical
terminus "cormus"?
If yes, then in my opinion the corm is the wrong word.
What I learned was that the corm (cormus) means an organism which had a
stem and a leaf. Those plants (and all higher Plants are so called)
where called Cormophytes. The Cormophytes where opposed to the
Then is there the word tuber:
My definition for a tuber is that the axle is swollen and have the
function as nutritive depot and the leafs where reduced to thin squamous
elements. For example tubers are: Potatoes (Solanum tuberosum,
Topinambur (Helianthus tuberous) or Colchicum.
In Germany is another term existing. It is called "Wurzelknollen" I did
not know the English word but translated it means "Root tubers".
You find it for example in Genus "Orchis".
The difference to tubers is the lacking of the reduced leafs and the
existing of a Calyptra also another inner structure.
Hoping the definitions would help a little bit.
What never in the Araceae appears are bulbs.

Thomas Mottl

 © 1995-2015 Mallorn Computing, Inc.All Rights Reserved.
Our Privacy Statement
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index