Re: Colocasia

From: "Eduardo Goncalves" edggon at hotmail.com> on 2001.02.15 at 18:21:21(5945) Dear D.J.Leedy, Thanks for your information. I was waiting for more replies, but it seems that serious classification of Colocasia is an arid topic. I think I will have to face Engler's classification. Best wishes, Eduardo. +More >From: "D.J. Leedy" Reply-To: aroid-l@mobot.org To: Multiple recipients of >list AROID-L Subject: Re: Colocasia Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 18:50:03 -0600 >(CST) > >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........" > > >----- Original Message ----- From: Eduardo Goncalves 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. > > > > _________________________________________________________________________ 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.