Which back issues??

From: Jack Honeycutt jhoneycutt at uswest.net> on 2000.06.12 at 01:07:03(4731) At 11:14 AM 6/11/2000 -0500, Pete wrote: >Your white variegated 'Rhaphidophora' is Monstera dubia. I am so confused. I need some basic literature to get up to speed. I just joined The Aroid Society and have requested some back issues of Aroideana. In addition, I have ordered: +More Index to Aroideana Aroids of Paupau New Guinea What I would like to get my arms around is Raphidophora and Monstera. Can anyone refer me to some books or literature to read? Thanks in advance. Jack in Portland Oregon

From: plantnut at macconnect.com (plantnut) on 2000.06.12 at 02:41:20(4732) Jack, Not much has been written about Aracee.... for a couple of reasons... (1.) Araceae has really just become popular within the last ten or fifteen years... and (2.) Grants are not easy to get and money is what greases the wheels of publishers. Another reason could be that there would be a limited audience for a major work... Several Scientists have bridged all of these obsticles. but they are high.... I have one copy of "A Revision of Monstera" by Dr. Michael Madison... Reprinted from "Contributions from The Gray Herbarium of Harvard University, No. 207" from 1977. You might want to write Harvard and see if they have copies available.... This is the only specific book that I am aware of.... nothing on Rhaphidophora.... Sad!!!! Dewey +More >At 11:14 AM 6/11/2000 -0500, Pete wrote: > >>Your white variegated 'Rhaphidophora' is Monstera dubia. > >I am so confused. > >I need some basic literature to get up to speed. I just joined The Aroid >Society and have requested some back issues of Aroideana. In addition, I >have ordered: > >Index to Aroideana >Aroids of Paupau New Guinea > >What I would like to get my arms around is Raphidophora and Monstera. Can >anyone refer me to some books or literature to read? > >Thanks in advance. > >Jack in Portland Oregon

From: "Peter Boyce" Boyce at pothos.demon.co.uk> on 2000.06.12 at 19:49:04(4735) Hi Jack Sorry to cause you confusion when I hoped to help! There is a bit of a mess in cultivation surrounding the genera related to Rhaphidophora. While most folks recognize Monstera deliciosa, the other genera (Rhaphidophora, Rhodospatha, Epipremnum, Scindapsus, Amydrium, Anadendrum, Alloschemone) are frequently cultivated under the wrong names. The plant you grow with white variegated leaves isn't a member of the genus Rhaphidophora (restricted to the old world tropics and defined by having fruits with many small starchy seeds) but is a member of the genus Monstera (restricted to the tropical Americas and defined by having fruits with few, largeish, starch-less seeds. There are couple of books you should try to get. One is The Genera of Araceae by Mayo, Bogner & Boyce published in 1997. It's available through the Society and while not cheap is a complete guide to the genera with many illustrations (but won't help you to name species). Another book you should try to get is Deni Bown's Aroids - Plants of the Arum family, which is due to be published in a much expanded second edition in September this year. Naming plants to species is often quite a time consuming job and is hampered by most of the literature for the task being published for the scientific market in the form of revisions of genera. However, most of the folks writing the species-level revisons of Araceae are subscribers to aroid-l (Tom Croat, Wilbert Hetterscheid, myself) and often a request on the site will illicit replies from these folks. Hope this helps some Pete +More ps You should also dent your credit card and order the entire back run of Aroideana - it's an incredible source of info.

From: SelbyHort at aol.com on 2000.06.12 at 19:50:38(4736) Jack, Probably you will want to add to your growing library the "Genera of the Araceae." (aka "the Bible") We just had a discussion on this newslist about the differences between Rhaphidophora and Monstera about two weeks ago in relation to the dwarf Monstera issue. You might check back in the aroid-l archives and locate Peter Boyce's discussion of these differences. I am including here his comments made on June 1: "Rhaphidophora and Monstera are, indeed, separated on fruit characteristics. Rhaphidophora has it's seeds (usually many, occasionally as few as four) arranged in two ranks running up the walls of the fruit and the mature seeds have endosperm; Monstera has few seeds (four, occasionally less), arranged in pairs in the middle of the fruit and the mature seeds lack endosperm." Other than that the above mentioned fruit differences, they are very closely related genera and vegetatively are not very different. Don't worry about your confusion! Very few of us would be able to easily distinguish the two genera without knowing anything about where the plant originated. Donna Atwood Selby Gardens +More << I need some basic literature to get up to speed. I just joined The Aroid Society and have requested some back issues of Aroideana. In addition, I have ordered: Index to Aroideana Aroids of Paupau New Guinea What I would like to get my arms around is Raphidophora and Monstera. Can anyone refer me to some books or literature to read? >>

From: StellrJ at aol.com on 2000.06.13 at 01:14:51(4744) In a message dated Sun, 11 Jun 2000 10:41:51 PM Eastern Daylight Time, plantnut@macconnect.com (plantnut) writes: << Jack, +More Not much has been written about Aracee.... for a couple of reasons... (1.) Araceae has really just become popular within the last ten or fifteen years... and (2.) Grants are not easy to get and money is what greases the wheels of publishers. Hmmm...I wonder if it is possible to "wear two hats;" on the one hand, be a sufficiently astute businessman (or woman!) to become wealthy, and on the other, have the interest and expertise in aroids to do the studies. Then, one would not have to worry about grants.... Jason Hernandez Naturalist-at-Large

From: Jack Honeycutt jhoneycutt at uswest.net> on 2000.06.13 at 01:16:25(4745) At 09:42 PM 6/11/2000 -0500, Dewey wrote: >I have one copy of "A Revision of Monstera" by Dr. Michael Madison... >Reprinted from "Contributions from The Gray Herbarium of Harvard >University, No. 207" from 1977. You might want to write Harvard and see >if they have copies available.... I'll keep an eye out. Thanks for the info! jack

From: Jack Honeycutt jhoneycutt at uswest.net> on 2000.06.13 at 02:42:39(4747) At 02:52 PM 6/12/2000 -0500, you wrote: >You might check back in the aroid-l archives and locate Peter >Boyce's discussion of these differences. Ah, OK, I'll give that a try. Thanks >Other than that the above mentioned fruit differences, they are very closely >related genera and vegetatively are not very different. OK > Don't worry about >your confusion! Very few of us would be able to easily distinguish the two >genera without knowing anything about where the plant originated. I am starting to get that idea! jack

From: Jack Honeycutt jhoneycutt at uswest.net> on 2000.06.13 at 02:46:47(4749) At 02:50 PM 6/12/2000 -0500, you wrote: >Hi Jack > >Sorry to cause you confusion when I hoped to help! The fog in my little pea brain is starting to lift! It is a struggle to get up to speed with a group of plants that I am not familiar with. Thanks for all your good information *and* putting up with my many remedial questions. >Rhaphidophora (restricted to the old world tropics and defined by having >fruits with many small starchy seeds) >Monstera >(restricted to the tropical Americas and defined by having fruits with few, >largeish, starch-less seeds. Ah. OK Got it. >There are couple of books you should try to get. One is The Genera of >Araceae by Mayo, Bogner & Boyce published in 1997. Probably my next purchase (well, after next pay day).... >Another book you should >try to get is Deni Bown's Aroids - Plants of the Arum family, which is due >to be published in a much expanded second edition in September this year. Found that and have it on order. >Naming plants to species is often quite a time consuming job and is hampered >by most of the literature for the task being published for the scientific >market in the form of revisions of genera. However, most of the folks >writing the species-level revisons of Araceae are subscribers to aroid-l >(Tom Croat, Wilbert Hetterscheid, myself) and often a request on the site >will illicit replies from these folks. Thanks again for the info. jack +More >Hope this helps some > >Pete > >ps You should also dent your credit card and order the entire back run of >Aroideana - it's an incredible source of info.

From: "Peter Boyce" p.boyce at rbgkew.org.uk> on 2000.06.14 at 02:12:03(4759) Jack, and others into monsteroids While Madison's Monstera revision is still the only show in town it's worth hunting out, BUT the genus needs a new revision since Madison recognizes fewer species in total than are now known occur in Panama and Cosa Rica alone! Pete +More ---------------------------- Peter Boyce Herbarium Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew Richmond, Surrey TW9 3AE Tel. (+44) (0)20 8 332 5207 fax. (+44) (0)20 8 332 5278 email: p.boyce@rbgkew.org.uk (work) boyce@pothos.demon.co.uk (home)

From: "Bonaventure W Magrys" magrysbo at shu.edu> on 2000.06.14 at 02:13:48(4762) Jason Hernandez writes: Hmmm...I wonder if it is possible to "wear two hats;" on the one hand, be a sufficiently astute businessman (or woman!) to become wealthy, and on the other, have the interest and expertise in aroids to do the studies. Then, one would not have to worry about grants.... Hell yeah, I'd be there!!! - BWM

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