IAS on Facebook
IAS on Instagram
|
IAS Aroid Quasi Forum
About Aroid-L
This is a continuously updated archive of the Aroid-L mailing list in a forum format - not an actual Forum. If you want to post, you will still need to register for the Aroid-L mailing list and send your postings by e-mail for moderation in the normal way.
Re: Colocasia
|
From: "D.J. Leedy" djleedy at netex.quik.com> on 2001.02.13 at 00:50:05(5936)
The following is on page 18 of the book TARO - A Review of Colocasia
Esculenta and Its Potentials, Edited by Jaw-Kai Wang and published by the
University of Hawaii Press, copyright 1983.
"There are probably thousands of cultivars of Colocasia in the world. More
than three hundred named varieties have been listed in Hawaii; some of these
are undoubtedly synonyms, but there can be little doubt that perhaps a
hundred and fifty to two hundred and fifty cultivars were known in
prehistoric days.
Colocasia cultivars are differentiated on the basis of siz; leaf shape and
size; color of petiole, leaf and corm flesh; flower shape and size; and
their various uses. The most comprehensive attempt to clasify and describe
Colocasia cultivars was carried out by Whitney, Bowers, and Takahashi (1939)
in Hawaii........"
| +More |
----- Original Message -----
To: Multiple recipients of list AROID-L
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2001 1:30 PM
Subject: Colocasia
> Dear Aroiders,
>
> Anybody out there has some kind of solid knowledge with Colocasia
> esculenta varieties, cultivars, etc? Sometime ago Peter told us that there
> was three varieties: C. esculenta var. esculenta (small, slustering
tubers),
> C. esculenta var. antiquorum (large, solitary tuber) and C. esculenta var.
> aquatilis (long stolons). Are those varieties published anywhere? (i.e.
with
> authors, etc) What happened with variety illustris? What about that form
> with an yellow blot in the middle of the leaves? The only complete
treatment
> I have (my Precambrian 'Das Pflanzenreich') cites lots of varieties and I
> wonder most of them became synonims. Other interesting thing is that
Engler
> never use tuber characters (except for the description of the variety
> aquatilis) so this is a new approach. Who did start to use tuber
information
> on the classification? Engler's classification uses the proportional
lenght
> of the sterile appendix. Is this still important or was it proven to be
> highly variable (like almost anything in aroids)? I am sorry if these
> questions were already answered before, but I couldn't find any
satisfatory
> answer in the aroid-l archives.
>
> Very best wishes,
>
> Eduardo.
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
>
>
|
|
Note: this is a very old post, so no reply function is available.
|
|