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

Re: [SANS] "stunted sansevierias"

At 11:55 PM 7/25/99 -0400, Juan Chahinian wrote:
>HI,
>OK, Hermine
>We have a semantic problem here, or rather apples and oranges.


yes semantic!


>Yes you are right, sansevierias can get stunted by not giving them enough
>space. I am sure you know that I know that.


I figured that you knew this. we all to some extent "bonsai" many plants by
container- growing them.


>What I was referring to was juvenile forms, which Steve called "stunted" and
>I injudiciously followed. So replace all my "stunted" words from my previous
>e-mail and  read "juvenile" instead.
>
>Clearly, stunting is one thing and juvenile form is another
>Again, S. canaliculata 'Dwarf' is a juvenile form.


RIGHT! if we could by "stunting" plants, cause them to revert to juvenile
form, it would be possible that merely by wearing very tight clothing, we
could revert to younger people! but this has not shown to be so.

and "artificially dwarfed" is not the same as juvenile.
In my dog-related studies, one comes upon true "toy" dogs who mature and
breed and age while retaining a tiny size, and dogs who are truly stunted
by starvation in puppyhood...even as are some  unfortunate people. but the
quality of the true cellular age is not changed.

hermine
this is actually me agreeing with you, but it got kind of baroque.
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index