No subject

[Arisaema Enthusiast Group (AEG) Discussion List (and other=]

hardy  Aroids)" <ARISAEMA-L at NIC.SURFNET.NL> Aroids)" <ARISAEMA-L at NIC.SURFNET.NL>
Sender: "Arisaema Enthusiast Group (AEG) Discussion List (and other=
From: "Jack Lambert (RJL6)" <rjl6 at CORNELL.EDU>
Subject: Re: A. Bockii
In-Reply-To: <l03110703b1028b6603ad@[24.128.93.95]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Roy wrote  >>>>>Did we ever resolve whether Nina's (and the other NARGS
seedex offspring) are really A. bockii? I heard rumblings once upon a tim=e
that these might actually be A. amurense.<<<<<<<<

No, it is not A. amurense.

Guy Gusman had a photograph in hand before he wrote his opinion in the
NARGS, Quarterly, Spring, 1997, Vol. 55, #2.  The points Guy made in that
article (p. 103) is that the material that I (via Bill Dilger and the
Moscow Botanical Garden) grow matches the herbarium specimen Engler (who
had only the spathe and fruit) described as A. Bockii but he (Guy)believe=s
what Engler described is A Bockii is a natural variation within the range
of A. yunnanense.  (Correcting what I assumed to be a typo in the
Quarterly), Bock von Rosthorn collected the specimen Engler later describ=ed
and named.  Guy's noted (p. 104) how difficult it is for "..botanists
working in their offices, to appreciate the natural variations and evalua=te
the possible synonymies....(and as a concequence there are these kinds of=)
descriptions...(that) still spread confusion in Arisaema taxonomy".

In short, Roy, what I think Guy concluded is that yes, it is really A.
Bockii but that no, A. Bockii isn't real.

Come on, Guy, chime in now and correct me least I have mis-described *you=*.
:>)

Nina