This is a public-interest archive. Personal data is pseudonymized and retained under GDPR Article 89.

Re: [SANS] Ref. S. schweinfurthii and "stunted sansevierias"

Juan Chahinian wrote:


>( i hermine, edited this gently and commented within the post)
>
>Stephen, I have dealt with Sansevierias for almost twenty years, possibly
>before you were born or you were 2-3 years old then, and I have never heard
>of or seen a "stunted Sansevieria". Sansevierias, as other plants, may go
>juvenile, and I know of at least ten of them that have, material for an
>upcoming article. One can never stunt a Sansevieria by any mechanical or
>fertilizing trick.


(I am holding up my hand to ask a question)

Juan, when we keep dividing plants, rather than permitting them to form the
adult and mature clump as they would in nature, we are keeping them
juvenile, and certain small, rather than allowing them to express their
adult size and form, yes?

And as Kirk confessed, and myself also, by keeping a plant in a tiny pot
for 10 years...it does not grow much. Any such "stunting" is perfectly
temporary. sometimes we say stunting or dwarfing to indicate this, as when
a plant is hideously in need of being potted into a bigger pot...ok, you
were saying....



>The fact that Teketay said that Sansevieria schweinfurthii is a synonym for
>S. erythraeae does not make it correct. Needless to say the fact that it was
>published in my journal does not mean that I agree with it.
>In fact, I just studied an inflorescence of S. schweinfurthii , with the help
>of Alan Butler, and it is certainly a plant on its own standing.


AHA! just as I expected!

>The
>invalidity of the name is due to the fact that there is no Latin description,
>required at the time of publishing. There is no reason whatsoever to change
>the name.
><snip>
>So, Sansevieria schweinfurthii 'Variegated'  is also a combination that needs
>to be kept.


Well this stands to reason.


>To do correct taxonomic work, and I told you this many years ago, one requires
>
>a) investigation of papers
>b) study of live plants
>c) study of plants in habitat
>d) study of herbarium specimens
>
>Stephen you are only doing a) in a very commendable way. But this is not
>enough.
>b), c) and d) are as important and it would be nice, and absolutely
>necessary, that you do b), c) and d) as well. There is no short cut.
>Taxonomic work is not the result of expedient elucubrations but of thorough,
>patient work.


This is why i said several  thousand years ago that you would have to
threaten me with DEATH for me to become a taxonomist.

ALSO real certified degreed taxonomists often disagree. i usually wait
three years to change labels after a taxonomy war is over.

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