Re: [aroid-l] A. spruceanum

From: Rand Nicholson writserv at nbnet.nb.ca> on 2004.01.30 at 13:30:03(11046) Hello Wilbert: No real puzzle. Obviously, in a highly excitable state of phalloid enthusiasm after receiving my shipment, I mislabeled Dracontium spruceanum as Amorphophallus spruceanum. Wishful thinking or duh? I suppose this is how some of those ugly taxonomic rumors get started. However, D. spruceanum _does_ look almost exactly like A. spruceanum (which, of course, does not exist) to my layman's eye. And, a rather large not-a-bulbil is developing on top of the leaf petiole. Do these eventually ever _do_ anything, or are they just arthritic wannabees? That clears that up. Thanks, and drop over for a beer some time you are in the country. Rand +More Eastern Maritime Canada z 5b (& -16 C.) >Hi Rand, > >This is a bit of a puzzling message: if A. stands for Amorphophallus, then >there's something wrong with the name because Amorphophallus spruceanum >doesn't exist. I did also send Dracontium spruceanum to some of you but >that's hardly an Amorph and Dracontiums do NOT make foliar bulbils, although >they DO develop swollen joints in the leaves to some degree. > >Cheerio, >Wilbert

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