Philodendron santa leopoldina

From: "john s. smolowe" johnsmolowe at pacbell.net> on 2001.11.04 at 20:51:46(7729) In his recent Aroidiana article on Philodendron spiritus-sancti, aka Philodendron santa leopoldina (the rare, desirable variety) Eduardo Goncalves suggests the species be made widely available by micropropagation. I emailed him and he wrote back: "I am just aware that there are no more than 5 known plants of P. spiritus-sancti in the wild. It can be considered almost extinct in the wild. I would love to see it being micropropagated, because it will remain as an amazing plant, even if it was being sold at K-Mart! Unfortunately, I do not have the facilities here, and I also do not have a living plant of it myself. That collected plant were donated to a private conservatory that has the proper infra-structure to grow it. Well, I think there are more plants of P. spiritus-sancti in the US than in Brazil (even considering the wild specimens!)." I'd be interested in contributing to a fund to make that happen. Does anyone know the practical details? I suppose we'd have to find and deal with an appropriate lab, and also find a willing owner of the correct plant. John Smolowe +More Menlo Park, CA

From: Betsy Feuerstein ecuador at midsouth.rr.com> on 2001.11.05 at 00:54:27(7730) I hear what you are saying, but I who just paid my left arm to get this plant, would just as soon we wait for the next millennium to do it. Those of us who have paid a fortune for it would think twice about such most likely. Also, it certainly would cut in the society's pocketbook take from the auctions. Just a personal come back to this discussion. Betsy +More "john s. smolowe" wrote: In his recent Aroidiana article on Philodendron spiritus-sancti, aka Philodendron santa leopoldina (the rare, desirable variety) Eduardo Goncalves suggests the species be made widely available by micropropagation. I emailed him and he wrote back: "I am just aware that there are no more than 5 known plants of P. spiritus-sancti in the wild. It can be considered almost extinct in the wild. I would love to see it being micropropagated, because it will remain as an amazing plant, even if it was being sold at K-Mart! Unfortunately, I do not have the facilities here, and I also do not have a living plant of it myself. That collected plant were donated to a private conservatory that has the proper infra-structure to grow it. Well, I think there are more plants of P. spiritus-sancti in the US than in Brazil (even considering the wild specimens!)." I'd be interested in contributing to a fund to make that happen. Does anyone know the practical details? I suppose we'd have to find and deal with an appropriate lab, and also find a willing owner of the correct plant. John Smolowe Menlo Park, CA

From: "Julius Boos" ju-bo at email.msn.com> on 2001.11.05 at 03:27:18(7731) ----- Original Message ----- From: john s. smolowe To: Multiple recipients of list AROID-L Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2001 3:51 PM Subject: Philodendron santa leopoldina Dear John, We think ALMOST alike on this, BUT I`d like you to consider the following first---the few people who have the $$ to have afforded to purchase a plant of this most wonderful Philodendron species certainly do NOT want it to become a K-Mart plant out of tissue culture at $5.00 a 'pop', so I am presently working on a plan which may just allow this plant to preserve it`s status AND monetary worth, and also increase it`s genitic variability in collections--hear me out. I propose that we contact the people who DO own plants of this now almost extinct Philodendron and ask them to 'lend' their plant or a cutting of it on 'breeding loan' to a central grower with experience in hand-pollenating this genus. He or she will fertilize and grow these plants so as that they are brought to bloom, then hand-pollenate them, and so obtain seed which can be grown to adult size in about three years (?). These new plants can be expected to show some genitic variability, some may be as beautiful in form and leaf texture to their parents, some less attractive, while some may be even MORE beautiful that the parent plants! Owner gets 'first choice' of the offspring!! These can be labled as seed-grown and will certainly remain as very valuable plants, and maybe THEN a tissue-cultured set can be made, these may not turn out to be as beautiful as or ever have the value of a wild-collected or 'from-seed' plant. Perhaps in the future some seed can be donated to a person in Brazil where they can be grown and then re-introduced back into the wild?? I am working on contacting some of the owners of these few plants that I am aware of and see what their response to this idea may be, or perhaps those of you who do own a plant of this and read this note can let me know your thoughts?? I`d love to steart a 'stud-book' of all the wild-collected plants here in the U.S.A. with notes on each, tracing it`s lineage as to if it is an originally wild-collected plant from Brazil or a cutting of one, the owner`s name, location, etc. P.S. I am the auctioneer who auctioned off the plants of this species at shows in Miami beginning with the wild-collected plants donated to the IAS by the late Betty Waterbury---my article on the last show and auction which took place last Sept. at Fairchild in Miami will be appearing in the next Aroid Newsletter, the one plant available at this past show went for over U.S.$600.00 at auction. Sincerely, Julius Boos. +More >>In his recent Aroidiana article on Philodendron spiritus-sancti, aka Philodendron santa leopoldina (the rare, desirable variety) Eduardo Goncalves suggests the species be made widely available by micropropagation. I emailed him and he wrote back: "I am just aware that there are no more than 5 known plants of P. spiritus-sancti in the wild. It can be considered almost extinct in the wild. I would love to see it being micropropagated, because it will remain as an amazing plant, even if it was being sold at K-Mart! Unfortunately, I do not have the facilities here, and I also do not have a living plant of it myself. That collected plant were donated to a private conservatory that has the proper infra-structure to grow it. Well, I think there are more plants of P. spiritus-sancti in the US than in Brazil (even considering the wild specimens!)." I'd be interested in contributing to a fund to make that happen. Does anyone know the practical details? I suppose we'd have to find and deal with an appropriate lab, and also find a willing owner of the correct plant. John Smolowe Menlo Park, CA

From: "john s. smolowe" johnsmolowe at pacbell.net> on 2001.11.05 at 06:30:06(7732) Gee, does the society really want to make $ by keeping species close to extinction? I'd sure feel guilty if my rare plant died after I refused to clone it - and God knows rare plants do die easily (that's a major reason why they are rare). Hopefully someone can envision a plan where everyone wins, including the owner and the beleaguered species. Would it not be possible, for example, to give a commission on each clone sold to the owner of the mother plant? That is what is done with orchids that are mericloned. $5 on each plant sold for the first 120 plants would cover the $600. Then the owner would have a free specimen, lots of us would have babies, and extinction would be averted. John Smolowe +More Menlo Park, CA Betsy Feuerstein wrote: I hear what you are saying, but I who just paid my left arm to get this plant, would just as soon we wait for the next millennium to do it. Those of us who have paid a fortune for it would think twice about such most likely. Also, it certainly would cut in the society's pocketbook take from the auctions. Just a personal come back to this discussion. Betsy "john s. smolowe" wrote: In his recent Aroidiana article on Philodendron spiritus-sancti, aka Philodendron santa leopoldina (the rare, desirable variety) Eduardo Goncalves suggests the species be made widely available by micropropagation. I emailed him and he wrote back: "I am just aware that there are no more than 5 known plants of P. spiritus-sancti in the wild. It can be considered almost extinct in the wild. I would love to see it being micropropagated, because it will remain as an amazing plant, even if it was being sold at K-Mart! Unfortunately, I do not have the facilities here, and I also do not have a living plant of it myself. That collected plant were donated to a private conservatory that has the proper infra-structure to grow it. Well, I think there are more plants of P. spiritus-sancti in the US than in Brazil (even considering the wild specimens!)." I'd be interested in contributing to a fund to make that happen. Does anyone know the practical details? I suppose we'd have to find and deal with an appropriate lab, and also find a willing owner of the correct plant. John Smolowe Menlo Park, CA

From: Dan Levin levin at pixar.com> on 2001.11.05 at 07:02:44(7733) Julius has a fine idea- absolutely worth pursuing- but it's rather time dependent by its scope and could reasonably take a decade to generate tangible results. In the meantime John's right, we and all remaining Philo. spiritus-sancti are quite mortal.... I then have to wonder if any current growers of this rare plant feel either the desire or obligation to further insure the survival and perpetuation of P. spiritus-sancti? That is- beyond protecting their monetary investment and exclusive status as one of the very few who can claim they own it. As we all bear witness to more and more of our favorite plants acquiring that infamous descriptor "almost extinct in the wild", where do we as the collectors and cultivators of such organisms begin to draw that line? Please note this is NOT meant to incriminate or otherwise put anyone who owns Philo. spiritus-sancti on the firing line. I pose this question most sincerely and devoid of taking some moral high ground. We could just as easily be discussing Paphiopedilum sanderianum 'Jacob's Ladder' or < your plant here >. --- Though Betsy, with all due respect to your recent expenditure and ascension in the P. spiritus-sancti ranks: If you're truly concerned about the fiscal welfare of our society please consider the broader benefits to be had if some kind soul were to donate a meristem of 'spiritus-sancti' (aka "left arm") to the society... ..and all lab work, growing out & eventual sales became the domain of the IAS itself.... We might see the ensuing plants offered at a premium price to the general public and at a "discounted" price to active IAS members. Bet our ranks and society's bank account would grow well beyond the $500 - $750 a year that selling only a single cutting could ever generate. Not to mention the positive PR and attention this could garner for our cause. In closing I'd like to reiterate one of Julius' comments: To the true collector, TC'd plants will never be as desirable nor as valuable compared to their wild-collected counterparts. - Dan Levin +More Piedmont, CA Betsy Feuerstein wrote: > I hear what you are saying, but I who just paid my left arm to get this plant, would just as soon we wait for the next millennium to do it. Those of us who have paid a fortune for it would think twice about such most likely. Also, it certainly would cut in the society's pocketbook take from the auctions. Just a personal come back to this discussion.

From: StellrJ at aol.com on 2001.11.05 at 16:35:25(7735) In a message dated Sun, 4 Nov 2001 10:27:49 PM Eastern Standard Time, "Julius Boos" writes: > Perhaps in the future some seed can be donated to a person in Brazil > where they can be grown and then re-introduced back into the > wild?? +More While I am all for reintroductions, this presupposes a habitat in which to reintroduce. If a plant becomes extinct, it is generally caused by lack of habitat in the first place. So, the first priority should be to restore or protect habitat, to prevent the extinction, and to provide a place for reintroduction. Consider an example from North America: the tree Franklinia alatamaha, which has been extinct in the wild for over 200 years, but still exists in cultivation. Why have there been no reintroductions? Probably there are no suitable sites for reintroduction. This despite the fact that Georgia has a State Park named after this tree. Jason Hernandez Naturalist-at-Large

From: Betsy Feuerstein ecuador at midsouth.rr.com> on 2001.11.06 at 06:46:15(7740) I want to say something before this gets any further. To promulgate that those who have, owe it to society to donate this plant to be cloned so it will be saved in the wild is somewhat next to saying we are responsible for it being rare in the first place. Since, to my knowledge, there is little or now collection data for this plant, because it originally was seen in the Brule Marx collection and bought in that area by three devout collectors years ago, how on God's green earth would you know where to re-establish it and then, where would the funding for such come from since it is very costly to undertake such a task. Just putting something back in the jungle in the area has a minuscule odds of survival. Are you going to stay there and tend to it? Many a plant has been saved from extinction by collectors and their genuine efforts to preserve in living form. To imply that the only way to save this plant itself, is to clone it, I highly doubt that one also. I am not saying that what you say does not have a grain of possibility, because it does, but on the other hand, the proven record of collectors preserving the perceived rare and little known, has a pretty darn good record. Look at the old Anthurium splendidum, (I know the name has been changed). It has hung around by cuttings. Look at Anthurium reflexnervium, it is still around and actually it is still around in the wild even though botancially speaking it was thought to be gone. Could it be that a few of your premises are slanted to the desire to have the plant and to genuinely save the plant in a specific way. Just maybe, those of us collectors have the same desire to save but perhaps not by the same means that you see. Perhaps at this moment, with all the discussion you give, we can agree to disagree. Funny, it is not the philosophical end that I see and that you see that is at odds. First, it is the presumption that this does not exist in the wild. How do you know that? Next, it is the presumption that the collector should give, the meristem doers would give without any monetary reward to them for their work and then that this would ever be successfully be reintroduced to the wild while being made available to the public. Your idea that the public would pay some large money for a cloned, mass produced plant, is rather ify. When plants become available, the price goes down. Many a plant has been cloned, come out on the market, sold, and never done again. Why, because the market did not last for that plant or times were such that it was not a high money maker and was let go. In that case, this flurry was fleeting and often is. Those of us who have been out there in the market place, watch plants come and go in the commercial realm and it usually is those that we see as special and neat. I would ask in these discussions if there is to be more, that the inference of guilt for a difference of opinion, be left off. I do not feel guilty for admiring the plant I just bought, for having no desire to cut it to donate for someone else to reap the benefit of my hard earned expenditure. Perhaps you are not aware of the very big risk of cutting philodendrons. I have lost both pieces of philodendron cuttings many a time. And along that line, many a cloning has failed. If at some point I want to take the risk of cutting this plant or any plant I have, in order that I share it with another, either for money or as a gift, it is my choice. I see that choice for every other person who has it. If one of them decides to have it cloned, I support their choice in that one also. If they decide to clone it and reap their own harvest for that effort along with the risks, that is also their choice. I hear a lot of promulgation of altruism by those who have for the benefit of those who do not. I also hear that it is our responsibility to make it available so that it can be introduced into the wild when the place that it came from is not known and support system to do such is non existent. I see that as a choice by the ones who have. I feel certain they will come to an appropriate conclusion and it may differ in form from those who want this plant for whatever reason or reasons. Betsy +More "john s. smolowe" wrote: Gee, does the society really want to make $ by keeping species close to extinction? I'd sure feel guilty if my rare plant died after I refused to clone it - and God knows rare plants do die easily (that's a major reason why they are rare). Hopefully someone can envision a plan where everyone wins, including the owner and the beleaguered species. Would it not be possible, for example, to give a commission on each clone sold to the owner of the mother plant? That is what is done with orchids that are mericloned. $5 on each plant sold for the first 120 plants would cover the $600. Then the owner would have a free specimen, lots of us would have babies, and extinction would be averted. John Smolowe Menlo Park, CA Betsy Feuerstein wrote: I hear what you are saying, but I who just paid my left arm to get this plant, would just as soon we wait for the next millennium to do it. Those of us who have paid a fortune for it would think twice about such most likely. Also, it certainly would cut in the society's pocketbook take from the auctions. Just a personal come back to this discussion. Betsy "john s. smolowe" wrote: In his recent Aroidiana article on Philodendron spiritus-sancti, aka Philodendron santa leopoldina (the rare, desirable variety) Eduardo Goncalves suggests the species be made widely available by micropropagation. I emailed him and he wrote back: "I am just aware that there are no more than 5 known plants of P. spiritus-sancti in the wild. It can be considered almost extinct in the wild. I would love to see it being micropropagated, because it will remain as an amazing plant, even if it was being sold at K-Mart! Unfortunately, I do not have the facilities here, and I also do not have a living plant of it myself. That collected plant were donated to a private conservatory that has the proper infra-structure to grow it. Well, I think there are more plants of P. spiritus-sancti in the US than in Brazil (even considering the wild specimens!)." I'd be interested in contributing to a fund to make that happen. Does anyone know the practical details? I suppose we'd have to find and deal with an appropriate lab, and also find a willing owner of the correct plant. John Smolowe Menlo Park, CA

From: Floral Artistry jjingram at pacbell.net> on 2001.11.06 at 06:47:23(7741) While I do not have this prized plant, I would like to put my input here. First, plants that are endangered are because of either human ignorance or greed. Second, if a plant can be tissue cultured, why not? Third, if I were to spend $600. on a plant, I would like to be able to increase it's numbers so as to protect my investment. And the best way to do this is tissue culture. We have the modern technology to save nearly everything on the planet (I said nearly). Tissue culture is the best way to ensure species perpetuation. I don't agree that $600. after tissue culture become $5.00 K-Mart plants. That is also pure ignorance. If a rare and endangered plant can be propagated in tissue culture, then the people propagating should have enough sense to know the value of the product. With TC, the plants can be offered for a fair market value, $150.00 -$200.00 and still be a very desirable plant. I have several plants that are in dire need of tissue culture; if there are any peoples out there who have a reputable and honest lab, let me know. I will contact them. But, once these plants are cultured, I'm not going to knock them out for $5.00 a pop. They will be greatly reduced in price but the market value is still there. And if you have a plant that is as desirable as the one we are speaking and you donate a plant for TC, then you should be entitled to a portion of the proceeds. That is only fair. I would demand the same if I were to give up my plant. John Ingram +More jjingram@pacbell.net www.floralartistry.org

From: "Ron Iles" roniles at eircom.net> on 2001.11.06 at 16:27:01(7747) I suggest there is a fundamental principle exemplified here. Thank you for precipitating it, Betsy. Wild plants & animals more & more are regarded as exigent "investment", ornamental "Works of Art" according to their rarity, beauty, ugliness or other "differences" In our finite "owning" of endangered species do we not accept the full responsibility for their survival? I submit that any right to exclusivity we claim in "owning" living breathing life must be from that life's viewpoint & is earned by our ability to protect it at all costs. Living Natural Works of Art differ from other urbane speculative Life "investments". They need to be propagated. If species are endangered then numbers need to be built up most rapidly into populations of sufficient size to survive in the worst scenario. I suggest this entails careful dissemination to an adequate range of secure venues. If the species was on the official Higher Vertebrate endangered list I would not be writing this. If there are only five P. spiritu-sancti left & this can be professionally confirmed then does the species not qualify for inclusion in the most critical category of CITES? Could it be the very first of already many rare & endangered aroids to be Internationally protected & therefore most expertly propagated by professional specialists such as yourself for posterity? Finally when there as few of species like Pandas left in the World "accession data" become non-priority. i.e. if there are only FIVE(!) "Pandas" in this desperate situation what the hell does it matter from what forest glade it came. And incidentally, most careful re-introduction of propagated endangered species is surely into areas where their chances of re-establishment are best, not unfortunately from the exact habitat from which they were threatened. The issue is a fundamental one. Those who "own" very rare species carry the custodial responsibility for their greatest chances of breeding & survival for posterity & have the skills & resources to ensure this. As with fauna this concerivably could lead to "endangered species" specialist nurseries who are stringently responsible & accountable. It seems that the days when any individual could export & import any wild species are virtually over. Unregulated adhoc amateur non-vocational "butterfly poaching" will be as dead as the Dodo maybe deservedly so if in these terrible days systems for legitimate overt collection with permits then becomes the rule. It would be wonderful if it could also lead to rapid global evolution of endangered wild species propagation specialists with plants as with key many animals. It is further idealistic & optimistic but one achieves nothing without ideas. Furthermore if it enforces rights of all other species & peoples on the Planet away from our own catastrophic exploitative discordant materialism it cannot be other than global good news for a change. I hope P. spiritu-sancti (CITES 1) & all the other as yet unprotected species can be saved from the brink. Well done, Betsy. Ron +More ----- Original Message ----- From: Betsy Feuerstein To: Multiple recipients of list AROID-L Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2001 6:47 AM Subject: Re: Philodendron santa leopoldina I want to say something before this gets any further. To promulgate that those who have, owe it to society to donate this plant to be cloned so it will be saved in the wild is somewhat next to saying we are responsible for it being rare in the first place. Since, to my knowledge, there is little or now collection data for this plant, because it originally was seen in the Brule Marx collection and bought in that area by three devout collectors years ago, how on God's green earth would you know where to re-establish it and then, where would the funding for such come from since it is very costly to undertake such a task. Just putting something back in the jungle in the area has a minuscule odds of survival. Are you going to stay there and tend to it? Many a plant has been saved from extinction by collectors and their genuine efforts to preserve in living form. To imply that the only way to save this plant itself, is to clone it, I highly doubt that one also. I am not saying that what you say does not have a grain of possibility, because it does, but on the other hand, the proven record of collectors preserving the perceived rare and little known, has a pretty darn good record. Look at the old Anthurium splendidum, (I know the name has been changed). It has hung around by cuttings. Look at Anthurium reflexnervium, it is still around and actually it is still around in the wild even though botancially speaking it was thought to be gone. Could it be that a few of your premises are slanted to the desire to have the plant and to genuinely save the plant in a specific way. Just maybe, those of us collectors have the same desire to save but perhaps not by the same means that you see. Perhaps at this moment, with all the discussion you give, we can agree to disagree. Funny, it is not the philosophical end that I see and that you see that is at odds. First, it is the presumption that this does not exist in the wild. How do you know that? Next, it is the presumption that the collector should give, the meristem doers would give without any monetary reward to them for their work and then that this would ever be successfully be reintroduced to the wild while being made available to the public. Your idea that the public would pay some large money for a cloned, mass produced plant, is rather ify. When plants become available, the price goes down. Many a plant has been cloned, come out on the market, sold, and never done again. Why, because the market did not last for that plant or times were such that it was not a high money maker and was let go. In that case, this flurry was fleeting and often is. Those of us who have been out there in the market place, watch plants come and go in the commercial realm and it usually is those that we see as special and neat. I would ask in these discussions if there is to be more, that the inference of guilt for a difference of opinion, be left off. I do not feel guilty for admiring the plant I just bought, for having no desire to cut it to donate for someone else to reap the benefit of my hard earned expenditure. Perhaps you are not aware of the very big risk of cutting philodendrons. I have lost both pieces of philodendron cuttings many a time. And along that line, many a cloning has failed. If at some point I want to take the risk of cutting this plant or any plant I have, in order that I share it with another, either for money or as a gift, it is my choice. I see that choice for every other person who has it. If one of them decides to have it cloned, I support their choice in that one also. If they decide to clone it and reap their own harvest for that effort along with the risks, that is also their choice. I hear a lot of promulgation of altruism by those who have for the benefit of those who do not. I also hear that it is our responsibility to make it available so that it can be introduced into the wild when the place that it came from is not known and support system to do such is non existent. I see that as a choice by the ones who have. I feel certain they will come to an appropriate conclusion and it may differ in form from those who want this plant for whatever reason or reasons. Betsy "john s. smolowe" wrote: Gee, does the society really want to make $ by keeping species close to extinction? I'd sure feel guilty if my rare plant died after I refused to clone it - and God knows rare plants do die easily (that's a major reason why they are rare). Hopefully someone can envision a plan where everyone wins, including the owner and the beleaguered species. Would it not be possible, for example, to give a commission on each clone sold to the owner of the mother plant? That is what is done with orchids that are mericloned. $5 on each plant sold for the first 120 plants would cover the $600. Then the owner would have a free specimen, lots of us would have babies, and extinction would be averted. John Smolowe Menlo Park, CA Betsy Feuerstein wrote: I hear what you are saying, but I who just paid my left arm to get this plant, would just as soon we wait for the next millennium to do it. Those of us who have paid a fortune for it would think twice about such most likely. Also, it certainly would cut in the society's pocketbook take from the auctions. Just a personal come back to this discussion. Betsy "john s. smolowe" wrote: In his recent Aroidiana article on Philodendron spiritus-sancti, aka Philodendron santa leopoldina (the rare, desirable variety) Eduardo Goncalves suggests the species be made widely available by micropropagation. I emailed him and he wrote back: "I am just aware that there are no more than 5 known plants of P. spiritus-sancti in the wild. It can be considered almost extinct in the wild. I would love to see it being micropropagated, because it will remain as an amazing plant, even if it was being sold at K-Mart! Unfortunately, I do not have the facilities here, and I also do not have a living plant of it myself. That collected plant were donated to a private conservatory that has the proper infra-structure to grow it. Well, I think there are more plants of P. spiritus-sancti in the US than in Brazil (even considering the wild specimens!)." I'd be interested in contributing to a fund to make that happen. Does anyone know the practical details? I suppose we'd have to find and deal with an appropriate lab, and also find a willing owner of the correct plant. John Smolowe Menlo Park, CA

From: "Julius Boos" ju-bo at email.msn.com> on 2001.11.06 at 21:01:38(7749) Friends, This is the letter concerning how seed production just may increase the genetic variability of this plant in the U.S.A. This was done a while ago before I considered that there are other different collections in Brazil. Someone with more and better knowledge of how genetics actually work is needed to comment on my drivel! Julius +More >>Of course the ideal situation would be to have available for us to 'work' with two or even more different clones/collections, and I am NOT an expert at genetics, BUT---let us consider and discuss this--- even if the two plants used are in fact clones/cuttings from the SAME plant that were made in Brazil, IF we manage to pollinate a bloom on one plant with pollen from a flower from a second cutting from the SAME plant, genetic variability will occur among the (hopefully !) hundreds of sibling seedlings, they would be 'brothers and sisters', but would differ one from the other ALMOST as much as my brother differs from me, for example (the difference would be because the two plants are from the same 'mother plant', while my brother and me are produced from two genetically different individuals). We could then work at choosing individual plants that appear more 'different' one from the other, to say two seedlings that may look more LIKE one another, and so when we use these for further breeding, we might maintain the genetic variability of this unique and remember, ALMOST extinct species! I certainly do NOT claim to have all or even some of the complex answers, but whatever we may choose to attempt with actual pollination for seed production MUST be better than tissue culture, which we KNOW will only produce exact clones of the tissue-donner 'mother' plant! Do you know where the plants that used to belong to a member in California now are?? Maybe THESE are from a different collection!?? ? As I said, someone really needs to start a record, a 'stud book' as it were, of ALL the known plants of this species outside Brazil, I`d do it IF someone were to give me the necessary inf.. Julius >>Julius, For your idea to work, don't you need two clones of P. s-l? All of the plants in the USA came from one collection... Bette Waterbury told us a story and Tom confirmed it that says all of the plants... yes,all of them... came from two cuttings that were taken from one plant on her trip to Rio... So, if two clones are needed.. You don't have two... only one... A Friend

From: Denis denis at skg.com> on 2001.11.07 at 20:49:12(7773) Dear John: I am in possession of a piece of the above described plant left to the International Aroid Society by Betty Waterbury. Over the years that I have held it, the plant has managed to make one top cutting per year. The society sells either the base section which grows a new top or the top cutting which we root. There has beenn dicussion of Tissue culturing this plant but I have been reluctant to do so as I thought there were better clones of this species out there that had better color. It is not the most vigorous plant out there, and I am not sure if we were able to put a piece in culture that it would number 1, survive to multiply in vitro and number 2, whether it would be vigorous enough to survive explanting to soil media. It would be a challenge. I will ask my friend, Randy Strode of Agristarts inc. if he would be willing to help us should we decide we want to do this thing. How much are you willing to spend on this project. This the top cutting sold for $750. at the IAS Auction. We would have to forgo selling next year's piece to be able to propagate it in TC as the process of harvesting the explant may kill the plant. Denis +More john s. smolowe wrote: > > In his recent Aroidiana article on Philodendron spiritus-sancti, aka > Philodendron santa leopoldina (the rare, desirable variety) Eduardo > Goncalves suggests the species be made widely available by > micropropagation. I emailed him and he wrote back: > > "I am just aware that there are no more > than 5 known plants of P. spiritus-sancti in the wild. It can be > considered > almost extinct in the wild. I would love to see it being > micropropagated, > because it will remain as an amazing plant, even if it was being sold > at > K-Mart! Unfortunately, I do not have the facilities here, and I also > do not > have a living plant of it myself. That collected plant were donated to > a > private conservatory that has the proper infra-structure to grow it. > Well, I think there are > more plants of P. spiritus-sancti in the US than in Brazil (even > considering > the wild specimens!)." > > I'd be interested in contributing to a fund to make that happen. Does > anyone know the practical details? I suppose we'd have to find and > deal with an appropriate lab, and also find a willing owner of the > correct plant. > > John Smolowe > Menlo Park, CA

From: Denis denis at skg.com> on 2001.11.08 at 00:54:43(7777) To: "aroid-l@mobot.org" aroid-l@mobot.org> Subject: Re: Philodendron santa leopoldina Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2001 16:02:13 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +More Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Organization: Silver Krome Gardens, Inc. References: KHELIILFGFBDEGOGFJPHAELLCBAA.jjingram@pacbell.net> Reply-To: denis@skg.com Dear Aroiders: Santa leopoldiana could not ever be a mass produced plant for K-Mart or Home Depot gardens centers. It would cost too much and it has value only as a collectible to someone who knows plants. If it were to be done(If it could be done)it would probably be very slow to grow in bottles and slow to grow in pots and at best be limited to 1000 or less units of production. No real production nursery would even want this slow-slow, spindly ugly duckling of a Phily. There is no way to justify the bench space being tied up for so long. But of course that's not stopped me from filling up 4 (6 x 92 foot) benches with collectible stuff (some of dubious quality) for breeding/propagation purposes. I'd do it just to say we tried if we can find a lab to take on the project. Denis at Silver Krome Gardens, Homestead Florida Floral Artistry wrote: > > While I do not have this prized plant, I would like to put my input here. > First, plants that are endangered are because of either human ignorance or > greed. Second, if a plant can be tissue cultured, why not? Third, if I were > to spend $600. on a plant, I would like to be able to increase it's numbers > so as to protect my investment. And the best way to do this is tissue > culture. We have the modern technology to save nearly everything on the > planet (I said nearly). > Tissue culture is the best way to ensure species perpetuation. I don't agree > that $600. after tissue culture become $5.00 K-Mart plants. That is also > pure ignorance. If a rare and endangered plant can be propagated in tissue > culture, then the people propagating should have enough sense to know the > value of the product. With TC, the plants can be offered for a fair market > value, $150.00 -$200.00 and still be a very desirable plant. > I have several plants that are in dire need of tissue culture; if there are > any peoples out there who have a reputable and honest lab, let me know. I > will contact them. But, once these plants are cultured, I'm not going to > knock them out for $5.00 a pop. They will be greatly reduced in price but > the market value is still there. > And if you have a plant that is as desirable as the one we are speaking and > you donate a plant for TC, then you should be entitled to a portion of the > proceeds. That is only fair. I would demand the same if I were to give up my > plant. > > John Ingram > jjingram@pacbell.net > www.floralartistry.org

From: Durightmm at aol.com on 2001.11.08 at 02:29:24(7781) Denis for clarification is this discussion a board decision? If this venture were succesful would all members be given an opportunity to acquire one? What price would be determined and how? There are many questions that need to be addressed. It would indeed be of benefit to us all and certainly a step in the right direction to perpetuate this species but it seems to me that this decision warrants more discussion Joe

From: "Ron Iles" roniles at eircom.net> on 2001.11.08 at 16:36:13(7785) Denis This recent blow-in alien thanks you for your wonderful caring so long for & propagating the rarity on behalf of the IAS. After all the care, I am glad that you will not have to sacrificed it for tissue culturing even for a year & hope that a supreme strain can be found. Sales of even a couple of hundred plants of just that one plant might make IAS resources significantly richer, & maybe with more rarities there might be benefit for the Rain Forest? Its probably all idealistic & impractical of course. I have many very distinct "one only" Spathiphyllum taxons & cultons which I would like to disseminate with other specialist "Arks". Where is the most economic to have quite small numbers of each tissue cultured in Florida please? I hope the Spiritu-sancti phenomenon is the beginning of a great new era of even greater caring & sharing in the IAS. Ron +More ----- Original Message ----- To: "Multiple recipients of list AROID-L" Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2001 8:49 PM Subject: Re: Philodendron santa leopoldina Dear John: I am in possession of a piece of the above described plant left to the International Aroid Society by Betty Waterbury. Over the years that I have held it, the plant has managed to make one top cutting per year. The society sells either the base section which grows a new top or the top cutting which we root. There has beenn dicussion of Tissue culturing this plant but I have been reluctant to do so as I thought there were better clones of this species out there that had better color. It is not the most vigorous plant out there, and I am not sure if we were able to put a piece in culture that it would number 1, survive to multiply in vitro and number 2, whether it would be vigorous enough to survive explanting to soil media. It would be a challenge. I will ask my friend, Randy Strode of Agristarts inc. if he would be willing to help us should we decide we want to do this thing. How much are you willing to spend on this project. This the top cutting sold for $750. at the IAS Auction. We would have to forgo selling next year's piece to be able to propagate it in TC as the process of harvesting the explant may kill the plant. Denis john s. smolowe wrote: > > In his recent Aroidiana article on Philodendron spiritus-sancti, aka > Philodendron santa leopoldina (the rare, desirable variety) Eduardo > Goncalves suggests the species be made widely available by > micropropagation. I emailed him and he wrote back: > > "I am just aware that there are no more > than 5 known plants of P. spiritus-sancti in the wild. It can be > considered > almost extinct in the wild. I would love to see it being > micropropagated, > because it will remain as an amazing plant, even if it was being sold > at > K-Mart! Unfortunately, I do not have the facilities here, and I also > do not > have a living plant of it myself. That collected plant were donated to > a > private conservatory that has the proper infra-structure to grow it. > Well, I think there are > more plants of P. spiritus-sancti in the US than in Brazil (even > considering > the wild specimens!)." > > I'd be interested in contributing to a fund to make that happen. Does > anyone know the practical details? I suppose we'd have to find and > deal with an appropriate lab, and also find a willing owner of the > correct plant. > > John Smolowe > Menlo Park, CA

From: "Michael Pascall" mickpascall at hotmail.com> on 2001.11.08 at 17:09:59(7788) How much does the IAS rely on funds from the Rare Plant Auction ? I will be sending along another lot of special Alocasias and some more Dracontiums . If the precious P.spiritus-sancti is put into culture we will all wait patiently for our own little bit. What we have as P.'Santa -Leopoldina' is a slow grower also, but it does not look anything like the photo on auction page. And 15 years ago it cost nearly Au$200 ! +More Michael Pascall, WHYANBEEL ARBORETUM,F.N.Q,AUSTRALIA _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From: "Julius Boos" ju-bo at email.msn.com> on 2001.11.09 at 16:23:35(7796) Dear Michael, I will leave the first part of your letter to be answered by someone who knows more about the finances of the IAS, and believe there will be an accounting in the next newsletter due out soon. Please post a pic. of what you guys are calling P. spiritus-sancti, I`d like to see it, and maybe Ed will be able to give a true I.D.? Aus. $200.00 is a LOT for a plant 15 years ago!!! Cheers, Julius +More >>How much does the IAS rely on funds from the Rare Plant Auction ? I will be sending along another lot of special Alocasias and some more Dracontiums . If the precious P.spiritus-sancti is put into culture we will all wait patiently for our own little bit. What we have as P.'Santa -Leopoldina' is a slow grower also, but it does not look anything like the photo on auction page. And 15 years ago it cost nearly Au$200 ! Michael Pascall, WHYANBEEL ARBORETUM,F.N.Q,AUSTRALIA<< _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

From: Denis denis at skg.com> on 2001.11.12 at 17:09:48(7806) Dear Joe: At this time there are too many variables involved with this project to even anticipate the price. We should cross that bridge after there is actual production tissue in the bottles. To me getting viable tissue growing and multiplying in vitro is the first step and most critical problem if we can find a willing TC lab to do the work. Certainly if it can be tissue cultured they will be available to members...who else would know enough to want one besides the people who hang out on Aroid-L? Denis +More Durightmm@aol.com wrote: > > Denis for clarification is this discussion a board decision? If this > venture were succesful would all members be given an opportunity to > acquire one? What price would be determined and how? There are many > questions that need to be addressed. It would indeed be of benefit > to us all and certainly a step in the right direction to perpetuate > this species but it seems to me that this decision warrants more > discussion Joe

From: "john s. smolowe" johnsmolowe at pacbell.net> on 2001.11.13 at 04:19:41(7811) Denis, I emailed Oglesby tissue culture and got the following recommendation of Venkatesh Krishnamurthy from them. Hope it's helpful. By the way, specialty nurseries like Tropiflora and Glasshouse Works perhaps might also want a few. John +More Dear Dr. Smolowe, Thank you for your interest in our tissue culture service. I view the web page and it is a very interesting Philo. As a commercial laboratory it is not cost effective or practical for us to do a few hundred plants. I can highly recommend Venky at 863-465-0184 (Lake Placid, Florida). He owns a company that does a lot of specialty products. He has done work for us, is very trust worthy and is familiar with Philo tissue culture. Regards, Gary Hennen Oglesby Plants International, Inc. garyh@oglesbytc.com Denis wrote: Dear Joe: At this time there are too many variables involved with this project to even anticipate the price. We should cross that bridge after there is actual production tissue in the bottles. To me getting viable tissue growing and multiplying in vitro is the first step and most critical problem if we can find a willing TC lab to do the work. Certainly if it can be tissue cultured they will be available to members...who else would know enough to want one besides the people who hang out on Aroid-L? Denis Durightmm@aol.com wrote: > > Denis for clarification is this discussion a board decision? If this > venture were succesful would all members be given an opportunity to > acquire one? What price would be determined and how? There are many > questions that need to be addressed. It would indeed be of benefit > to us all and certainly a step in the right direction to perpetuate > this species but it seems to me that this decision warrants more > discussion Joe

Note: this is a very old post, so no reply function is available.