It is perhaps worthmentioning here that a few years ago some batches of t/c Xanadu released byTwyfords proved to be stunted and the leaves remained very small. When Ibrought this to their attention they admitted that there was a t/c problem andthey would be replaced. (in my case this didn’t actually happen.)
From what Julius issaying I imagine they had had too strong a dose of dwarfing chemical. I stillhave some of them kicking around in my nursery.
John.
From:aroid-l-bounces@gizmoworks.com [mailto:aroid-l-bounces@gizmoworks.com] On Behalf Of ju-bo@msn.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 30,2009 10:59 AM
To: dan.kistner@gmail.com;aroid-l@gizmoworks.com
Subject: Re: [Aroid-l] Xanadu'Boos'
Dear Dan,
I saw these plants for sale at the show, and knew I`d have to try toaddress/explain the ''why'' of this sooner or later, so here goes, and I HOPEthan Ron Weeks can forward this to our mutual great friend John De Mott atRedlands Nursery in S. Miami.
OK--I think that the plants in question were offered for sale by John De Mott`sNursery, I guess they just stuck the word ''boos'' on the end for ''kicks andgiggles'', or because I am in fact a co-author on the description of P. xanaduas a new species (the other authors are Dr. Tom Croat and Dr. SimonMayo).
John, a GREAT guy whom I met just months ago (he was at the show!),had been investigating exactly ''WHAT'' P. xanadu is. He had gonethrough several thousand ''liner'' plants of P. xanadu fresh from the tissueculture labs, and chosen any which stood out or demonstrated by size, color orform gross differences from their siblings, his collection of around 50 (?)plants is remarkable! We wait to see what these unique selections ofJohn`s may grow to look like!
My co-authoring the article where P. xanadu was described as a NEWspecies of Philodendron, and my second article also in Aroideana where Iexplained CLEARLY that P. xanadu was VERY different to P. bipinnatifidium, issaid to have had implications. The original patent which protected P.xanadu from being reproduced by any other method except by tissue culture, andsold ONLY by the patent-holders was issued because it was CLAIMED that P.xanadu originated from seed of P. bipinnatifidum, and therfor was just aDIFFERENT form/clone of P. bipinnatifidium, which ''justified'' the patent. Iunderstand that the description of P. xanadu as a new species somehow cancelledthe patent, BUT--I am NOT certain on this point!!
As I outlined in my recent article, the treatment with various chemicals duringthe ''tissue culture'' process (one to ''dwarf'' it, another to encouragemultiple growth/clumping, etc.) renders the commercially available 3 gal. potof P. xanadu almost unrecognizable if one compares it to an OLD plant which hasbeen left to ''grow out'' from this treatment w/ chemicals! This''growing out'' may take years, up to 15 or more, or in some cases a certainsingle plant for unknown reasons may suddenly ''take off'' and grow larger,with the leaf blades/rear lobes greatly enlarged like any self respectingMeconostigma species of Philodendron SHOULD demonstrate! SometimesIF one chooses a single , larger plant out of a group, and grows it by ITSELF,this may hasten the process. If one is vigilant, one might be able tofind a few or one plant in a bed of OLD P. xanadus which demonstrate thisfeature. At this stage I also suspect that the larger commerciallyavailable Philodendron clone ''Showboat"" is just the same P. xanadu,but these plants have received no or MUCH less of the chemicals used in theproduction of P. xanadu.
I had a rather unpleasant encounter with a Meconostigma afficionado at theAroid meeting, he stopped JUST short of calling me a liar! He claimedthat P. xanadu NEVER ''grows out'' to demonstrate the ''normal' shape of theleaf blade, thet in his experience the rear lobes always remain ''reduced'',etc. I tried explaining to him that in my recent article, Ipublished actual photos of two plants (Steve Lucas is presently growing one,Ron Weeks' great dog ''Luke'' made short work of the other!) which CLEARLYdemonstrated that in OLD plants, taken out from a clump and left to grow overYEARS (15 +), the plants actually grow larger, and the rear lobes DO in fact changeand enlarge to the point that it radically changes the appearance of the plant,making it a ''normal'' Meconstigma sp. with leaf blades as would be expected ina species of the group. His most unpleasant response was that I was theauthor, and that I was able to publish any photo I chose and say anything Iwanted, that more or less I had published photos and information that werefalse! Let me add that I have observed these changes in some individualplants in commercially planted beds of this species, rare, but there none theless!
'Nuf said.
Good Growing.
Julius Boos
W.P.B., FLORIDA
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2009 09:28:23 -0400
Subject: Xanadu 'Boos'
From: dan.kistner@gmail.com
To: ju-bo@msn.com
Hello, I went to the Aroid Show and sale at Fairchild Gardensa couple of weekends ago and I purchased a Philodendron Xanadu 'Boos'. I waswondering if it were named that because of you. If not, disregard this emailand accept my apologies for bothering you. If it is named 'Boos' for you, Iwasn't sure exactly what made it different than any other xanadu? It isn'texactly the easiest plant to GOOGLE ha ha ha. Thank you for your time and Ihope you can get me an answer.
Thanks, Dan Kistner
IAS on Facebook
IAS on Instagram
