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: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms?

  • Subject: RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms?
  • From: "W. George Schmid" <hostahill@bellsouth.net>
  • Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 11:11:33 -0400
  • Thread-index: Acdl+7kZrm+eFiXFRg2Fh390PsUgGAASqm+A

Some time ago we had an exchange on registering aroid cultivars in
PLANTS 2004 edition). I made some suggestions and Derek worked on this also.
Perhaps we can refresh our previous conversations and efforts. The problem I
see in Araceae is to determine which aroids are valid taxa to be handled
under the ICBN and which are in fact cultivated varieties (man-made hybrids)
to be registered under the ICNCP. One of the problems we had under Hosta
were the numerous interspecific, natural hybrids existing in the wild. We
solved that problem by field investigations and accepted such hybrids as
taxa if perpetuating populations were found to exist in the wild. In some
cases, the holotypes were based on cultivated plants purportedly collected
in the wild, but lacking field verification were reduced to cultivars under
the ICNCP and so registered. From some of the earlier messages I deduce that
interspecific hybridization may also be a problem with aroids. To determine
synonymy, RAPD/DNA was employed to make the differentiations. That is an
expensive process, though. It seems to me that a number of aroids in
cultivation are not taxa (valid species) but culta (cultivars). George

W. George Schmid
Hosta Hill R. G.
USDA Zone 7a - 1188 feet (361m) AMSL
84-12'-30" W 33-51' N
All mail virus-scanned by McAfee

-----Original Message-----
From: aroid-l-bounces@gizmoworks.com [mailto:aroid-l-bounces@gizmoworks.com]
On Behalf Of Julius Boos
Sent: Tuesday, 13 March, 2007 17:28
To: aroid-l@gizmoworks.com
Subject: RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms?

>From : 	Brian Williams <pugturd@alltel.net>
Reply-To : 	Discussion of aroids <aroid-l@gizmoworks.com>
Sent : 	Tuesday, March 13, 2007 3:20 AM
To : 	Discussion of aroids <aroid-l@gizmoworks.com>
Subject : 	[Aroid-l] Names for different forms?

Dear Brian,

This all goes back to an issue that to date has not been 'solved' by the
aroid group, and which is a VERY difficult issue, namely the cultivar names
and the correct registering of these names according to whatever
horticultural rules/laws that may apply.
The IAS has nominated several people over the past several years ( I can
recall at least three)  to do something about setting up some sort of
registry to legitimize some or all of these names which are being bantered
about, but to date I think the progress on instituting this system is not in
place or even being worked on.
I have mentioned on several occasions that when man collectes a certain
plant from nature, he usually selects one which to him is the most
attractive out of several hundred, maybe thousands of other 'less 
attractive' specimens he may see in the field.   All of these plants, both 
the 'attractive' ones AND the less attractive ones are still all variations
of ONE species.
All I can suggest at this time is that you make a label that explains what
the particular clone or var. of that plant is, for example Philodendron
stenolobum var. narrow/wavy/long leaf, and/or P. stenolobum var. short and
broad leaf, or 'Anthurium warocqueanum var. Murline Lydon minature', vs. 
'Anthu. warocqueanum var. large leaf '.   Collection data and collectors 
name would be another good bit of information to keep with all wild
collected plants.
Perhaps Derek Burch can give some sort of suggestion or soloution that may
serve you guys better??

The  Best,


>>I have recently been trying to up grade my data base of names as well 
>>as redo all my tags and make sure everything has as much data and 
>>information as possible. I have a few questions on forms. I know many 
>>plants have several forms of the same species. I would like to know if 
>>their are names for these forms or even if the science community really
makes note of it?
>>If not would putting a added portion to the name to help ID different 
>>forms be possible? If so who should come up with these name? Here are 
>>a few for instance off hand that I really think should have some more 
>>information.  Their seems to be two very different forms of Veitchii 
>>one with wider leaves and much larger ripples. Then another form with 
>>thinner leaves and a much more rippled effect. I know that naming all 
>>slight different forms would not be worth while but for some very 
>>noticeable differences it could help people know exactly what they are 
>>getting and their seems to be a major price difference in one form 
>>compared to the other. Another one that comes to mind is the two forms 
>>of Anthurium warocqueanum one that can get 3 to 4 feet long and the 
>>smaller slender form with hardly any back lobes. They are very 
>>noticeably different yet go by the exact same name. If one was to 
>>order the plant under these name they could end up with either form 
>>though one form of each is usually much more sought after.<<
Aroid-l mailing list

Aroid-l mailing list

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