Re: [Aroid-l] Supervolute vernation vs. convolute

From: Don Bittel <donbit121 at hotmail.com> on 2010.01.21 at 05:03:53(20506) Steve, etc.,      I think these drawings do make sense of this. Philodendrons would be convolute, with a newly forming leaf inside of the opening leaf. Anthuriums would be supervolute, since they don't have that leaf inside the opening leaf. Antway, it is a fine distinction, and not that important for the average grower.     But I have always watched out the involute anthuriums, the pachyneuriums, since they are not all birdnest types, and they usually breed with each other. I've made many crosses with heart shaped leaves crossed with linear leaved rosette types. I have had watermaliense cross with convolute/supervolute types like pedato-radiatum and dressleri. The leaves come out with a mix of involute and convolute. But I have never had a birdnest type cross outside of the pachynerium section, with a convolute type.     So, I would guess that 99.999 percent of the anthurium 'hookeri' plants sold anywhere are definitely not hybrids of the true hookeri, since I doubt it could ever cross with pachyneriums. I hope to try some of these anyway, when my hookeri starts to flower.     Thanks for starting this confusing topic, Steve. It's been fun! Don Bittel HTML +More Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 10:17:17 -0600 From: Steve@exoticrainforest.com To: aroid-l@gizmoworks.com; abri1973@wp.pl Subject: [Aroid-l] Supervolute vernation. Finally a photo! I screwed up big time andinserted the wrong drawing.  These are the correct drawings from Stern's showing the placement ofthe midrib.  It appears the only difference in supervolute andconvolute is a leaf forming around another leaf but frankly I stilldon't have a completely satisfactory explanation.  I try almost daily on my website to make subjects like this clearer foranyone interested in aroids that does not have or is not interested inearning a degree in botany.   I am now to the point of completelyremoving the subject since I am no longer sure I fully understand it orcan help anyone else to understand.  I don't believe any definition in print in any of the 5 botanicaldictionaries I now own make the distinction (if any) between convoluteand supervolute clear.  At least in the dictionaries they appear to besynonymous and are one and the same. Steve www.ExoticRainforest.com Marek Argent wrote: Steve,   We cannot talk about vernation typesnot seeing the midrib as it is presented on the second drawing. It can as well be a half of a leafrolled involutely.   The third drawing (convolute) iswhat I thought about (but I was afraid to say) - that the term "convolute" may referonly to at least two objects like one leaf inside another one ora spadix wrapped by a spathe.   Anyway in my cord photos, the thirdtype, although probably not occuring in Araceae is possible, so it must have a nametoo.   It's becoming complicated...   Marek - These drawings are from William T. Stern's Botanical Latin,4th edition. Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service. Get it now.--_5e487eda-9ec8-4e07-8daf-4b8a20c5ea3f_----============== 52405211359543436=

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