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
New Trillium species discovered

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

RSS story archive

Re: Monstera question..

  • Subject: Re: Monstera question..
  • From: "mossytrail" <mossytrail@hctc.com>
  • Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 16:36:37 -0800

>M. friedrichstahalii
> is a synonym of M. adansonii. However, plants of mistaken
> determination labeled M. friedrichstalii were actually M.
> siltepecana.  

:Pulling out my hair:  AAARRRRGGGHHH!!

How is anyone supposed to keep all this straight?  So in my
last Aroideana article, I made reference to a plant that
could have been either one of two possible species, neither
of which are the name I used.  I identified it as M.
freidrichsthallii based in part on _Exotica 4_, supplemented
by Internet images.  So now I'm spinning in circles
wondering whether it was M. adansonii, or M. siltepecana. 
It was a persisting plant from a garden long since reverted
to rainforest in Hawaii, so there is no way to know the

All I can say is, it's a good thing that species was just a
"cameo" in my article, not one of the main foci.

Jason Hernandez
Aroid-L mailing list

Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index

 © 1995-2017 Mallorn Computing, Inc.All Rights Reserved.
Our Privacy Statement