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: "George R. Stilwell, Jr." <GRSJr at WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject: Re: A. fargesii  to A. franchetianum?
In-Reply-To: <005001c22832$8b726100$6501a8c0 at nc.rr.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Petra,


Pascal lucidly explains the reduction in his posting 7-10-02. I don't
think blooming date is a stable taxonomic character. For example, I have
A. tortuosum that bloom in May and I have some that bloom in August.
There is also another group that blooms in July.

Some of my A. triphyllum clump and some don't. Still they're all A. triph=yllum
without a doubt. So is clumping a stable character? Probably not.

Ray

At 12:55 PM 7/10/2002 -0400, you wrote:
>This is not an easy one to accept...fargesii and franchetianum as being =the
>same???????
>
>fargesii blooms earlier (May in NC) and tends to clump
>easily...franchetianum blooms later (late June-July) and doesn't clump
>easily...not to mention the differences in leaf shape and thickness and =the
>spathe differences....what characters are you using to lump these two
>together?
>
>I haven't looked at the archives yet and I will be sure to do so...for n=ow,
>I'm suprised about the lumping of the species...are you publishing this
>somewhere soon...we, in the world of nursery businesses, want to keep up
>with what taxonomists present.
>Petra
>
>
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "P.Bruggeman" <pbruggeman at WISH.NET>
>To: <ARISAEMA-L at NIC.SURFNET.NL>
>Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2002 10:35 AM
>Subject: Re: A. fargesii to A. franchetianum?
>
>
>> Dear Marge,
>>
>> Maybe I might be able to explain to you the fargesii to franchetianum
>> problem because I am partly responsible for your confusion. For a more
>> in-depth explanation you have to look in the AEG-archives (26/08/2002)=but
>> in short it comes to this. Wilbert Hetterscheid and I have analysed th=e
>> (somewhat incomplete) original descriptions and most forms of these 2
>> species currently in cultivation. We have looked at the various flower=and
>> leaf characters and tried to find characters that distinguished one
>species
>> from the other. In order for a species to be named as such, it must be
>> possible to describe a stable, unique character OR set of characters
>(shape
>> of female flowers for example) that distinguishes that species from
>related
>> species. Unfortunately we have not been able to find any stable charac=ter
>or
>> set of characters that set the 2 apart. All the characters could be fo=und
>in
>> every conceivable combination which suggests that they were all variat=ions
>> of the same species. Whenever that happens, the name for that species
>would
>> be the oldest of the 2, in this case franchetianum.
>>
>> I can understand that this sounds somewhat hard to accept given the
>> variation of the spathe shape but we feel our conclusion is justified
>based
>> on the number of forms we have examined. Although some individual plan=ts
>are
>> horticulturally quite distinct, taxonomically they seem impossible to
>> separate. Show me 2 horticulturally separate forms and I can show you =an
>> intermediate form........
>>
>> The problem is that we are dealing with a genus that is extremely vari=able
>> which means that sometimes we can't put an exact label on a plant, eve=n if
>> we want to. Those of us who have seen and examined Arisaema in the wil=d
>know
>> that some species can be very variable, even in single populations.
>> Franchetianum/fargesii seems to be just such a case and the same situa=tion
>> could be found in species like for instance consanguineum, elephas or
>> lobatum. This variation even lead the Japanese botanist Jin Murata to
>> conclude that a lot of Japanese species previously described as separa=te,
>> were not as separate when looked at on a larger scale during populatio=n
>> studies. Although nodes within the variation range could be named, the
>> intermediate forms showed that the flower characters previously used f=or
>> discriminating between the species were not stable. He therefore creat=ed
>the
>> "serratum-group" and renamed a considerable number of species to serra=tum,
>> not because they were the same but because he failed to find stable
>> characters to distinguish them on. The choice he then made was to name
>them
>> all serratum until new characters were found to distinguish them on.
>>
>> The friction comes when nurseries and collectors want to put a label o=n a
>> specific plant when that is taxonomically hard to justify. It is then =up
>to
>> the individual to accept the choice made by taxonomists. You could als=o
>> decide to leave the situation as it is and for nurseries that option i=s
>> quite understandable because they rather sell a plant under a separate
>name
>> then offer 2 plants as A. species "... " var. 1 & 2. The third option
>would
>> be to not bother at all about the name and simply enjoy the flowers!
>>
>> I don't know if I have taken away your confusion but hopefully you get=an
>> idea what the reasoning behind the move from fargesii to franchetianum
>> choice was.
>>
>> Pascal
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
>> Van: Arisaema Enthusiast Group (AEG) Discussion List (and other hardy
>> Aroids) [mailto:ARISAEMA-L at NIC.SURFNET.NL]Namens Marge Talt
>> Verzonden: woensdag 10 juli 2002 6:06
>> Aan: ARISAEMA-L at NIC.SURFNET.NL
>> Onderwerp: A. fargesii to A. franchetianum?
>>
>>
>> > From: George R. Stilwell, Jr. <GRSJr at WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
>> >
>> > But then A. fargesii should have come up even though it's name has
>> been
>> > reduced to A. franchetianum. It can't be that fussy.
>> ----------
>>
>> Oh Ray...don't tell me I've got to re-learn that plant's name yet
>> again.  It was purchased as A. franchetianum and then research
>> indicated it was actually A. fargesii...so are these not two separate
>> species now?
>>
>> Marge Talt, zone 7 Maryland
>> mtalt at hort.net
>> Editor:  Gardening in Shade
>> -----------------------------------------------
>> Current Article: Planting Basics: Soil
>> http://www.suite101.com/welcome.cfm/shade_gardening
>> ------------------------------------------------
>> Complete Index of Articles by Category and Date
>> http://mtalt.hort.net/article-index.html
>> ------------------------------------------------
>> All Suite101.com garden topics :
>> http://www.suite101.com/topics.cfm/635
>>
>