|
Naturalist-at-Large
> Certainly 'species' such as A. macrorrizos and A.
> cucullata bend the boundaries a lot. What is of course
> interesting is that A. macrorrhizos (notwithstanding its
> doubtful 'pure' species status) is definitely related (and
> here we are talking molecularly) to some unquestionably
> 'good' species, such as A. portei and A. flabellifer,
> which poses even more difficulties. It is also problematic
> to lalk about utilization of cultivars, especially those
> that are selections of what may themselves be cultivars,
> albeit so long-standing that they have effectively
> stabilized and function as species, even to the extent
> that they have lost the ability to hybridize with other
> elements of what was once a single gene pool.
>
> Forgive me if I appear to be avoiding answering your
> suggestion. But the fact is that I am not sure HOW to
> answer. The bottom line is that, at present, we can only
> be sure that A. macrorrhizos and A. cucculata are NEVER
> found away from human disturbance in 'habitat' and
> furthermore, away from the attention of horticulturists
> are remarkable morphologically stable.
>
> As a final thought on this, it is also important to
> remember that species framework, and the interspecific
> crossing is often in nature not just a matter of
> 'incompatibility'. Distribution, flowering time even down
> to the level of time of day, and how these barriers
> function to manage pollinators, or select for a
> particular pollinator guild, are as much, if not more, a
> barrier than simple unrelatedness. If ever an example was
> needed of the role of pollinator guild niche selection,
> the orchids of the Stanhopineae contain numerous examples.
>
> Cheers
>
> Pete
>
_______________________________________________
Aroid-L mailing list
Aroid-L@www.gizmoworks.com
http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l
|
IAS on Facebook
IAS on Instagram
