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: Anthurium

At 01:10 PM 5/9/99 -0500, you wrote:
>Hi everyone.
>My name is Robert Arias  rharias@juno.com
>This is my first e-mail to aroid-l.
>Some of you already know me as the editor of the Aroid Club of Tampa
>Bay's newsletter, "The Spathifile".
>I've been trying to put together a list of all the aroids for our members
>and I've come across a few problems that I need a little help with.
>The first problems are in Anthurium.
>What am I to do with Anthurium grande
>Which is valid:
>Anthurium grande N. E. Br. 1905
>Anthurium grande Sod. 1905
>Anthurium grande hort. Bull ex Gard. Chron 1865
>and what do I do with the others.

robert, I would say the Anthurium grande N. E. Br. 1905 is the legitimate

Anthurium grande Sodiro, Anales Univ. Centr. Ecuador 20. 1905 = A.
conspicuum Sodiro
Anthurium grande hort. Bull 1865. the hort. tag puts this one out of the

Next one:
>Anthurium palmatifidum Van Houtte ex Schott 1865
>Anthurium palmatifidum Lem. 1846

The only reference I could find was for the Van Houtte ex Schott 1865. It
is listed as nom. dubium

>Also, what is going on with Anthurium scandens?

A. scandens has so many subsp. and var.  I think a  great many are
different species but any scandent anthurium was probobly given a varietal
name of scandens when some may be distinct species.

>I've been out of touch living in my own small world when someone
>shattered my reality by saying that this name may be invalid.

The name was validly published so it is valid. As follows: A. scandens
(Aubl.) Engl., Fl. Bras. 3(2):78. 1878.

12 subspp. forms. and varieties are also listed, some in synonomy.

>Please inform me of this.
>I'm sure you'll be "hearing" more questions from me in the near future.
>Thank You.
>Robert Arias
>Tampa, FL
>You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
>Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
>or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]

 © 1995-2017 Mallorn Computing, Inc.All Rights Reserved.
Our Privacy Statement
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index