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.

  Names for different forms?
From: Brian Williams <pugturd at alltel.net> on 2007.03.12 at 20:20:11(15405)
I have recently been trying to up grade my data base of names as well as
redo all my tags and make sure everything has as much data and
information as possible. I have a few questions on forms. I know many
plants have several forms of the same species. I would like to know if
their are names for these forms or even if the science community really
makes note of it? If not would putting a added portion to the name to
help ID different forms be possible? If so who should come up with these
name? Here are a few for instance off hand that I really think should
have some more information. Their seems to be two very different forms
of Veitchii one with wider leaves and much larger ripples. Then another
form with thinner leaves and a much more rippled effect. I know that
naming all slight different forms would not be worth while but for some
very noticeable differences it could help people know exactly what they
are getting and their seems to be a major price difference in one form
compared to the other. Another one that comes to mind is the two forms
of Anthurium warocqueanum one that can get 3 to 4 feet long and the
smaller slender form with hardly any back lobes. They are very
noticeably different yet go by the exact same name. If one was to order
the plant under these name they could end up with either form though one
form of each is usually much more sought after.

+More
From: "Julius Boos" <ju-bo at msn.com> on 2007.03.13 at 14:27:32(15410)
Reply-To : Discussion of aroids
Sent : Tuesday, March 13, 2007 3:20 AM
To : Discussion of aroids
Subject : [Aroid-l] Names for different forms?

Dear Brian,

This all goes back to an issue that to date has not been 'solved' by the
aroid group, and which is a VERY difficult issue, namely the cultivar names
and the correct registering of these names according to whatever
horticultural rules/laws that may apply.
The IAS has nominated several people over the past several years ( I can
recall at least three) to do something about setting up some sort of
registry to legitimize some or all of these names which are being bantered
about, but to date I think the progress on instituting this system is not in
place or even being worked on.
I have mentioned on several occasions that when man collectes a certain
plant from nature, he usually selects one which to him is the most
attractive out of several hundred, maybe thousands of other 'less
attractive' specimens he may see in the field. All of these plants, both
the 'attractive' ones AND the less attractive ones are still all variations
of ONE species.
All I can suggest at this time is that you make a label that explains what
the particular clone or var. of that plant is, for example Philodendron
stenolobum var. narrow/wavy/long leaf, and/or P. stenolobum var. short and
broad leaf, or 'Anthurium warocqueanum var. Murline Lydon minature', vs.
'Anthu. warocqueanum var. large leaf '. Collection data and collectors
name would be another good bit of information to keep with all wild
collected plants.
Perhaps Derek Burch can give some sort of suggestion or soloution that may
serve you guys better??

The Best,

Julius

+More
From: "Wilbert Hetterscheid" <hetter at xs4all.nl> on 2007.03.13 at 23:43:47(15411)
Hi Brian and Julius,

This is one of those subjects that I myself am engaged in professionally,
as taxonomist of both plants in the wild and cultivated. Professional
taxonomists may consider that identifying a specific variant in nature is
useful and in that case they can make use of the classification categories
of forma (f.) or varietas (botanical variety; var.). With the growing
awareness of morphological dynamics in nature, this practice is slowing
down considerably, at least in the "western" countries. This is good
because all those var's and f's create more and more names and have a
tendency to blurr the evolutionary infraspecific dynamics of groups of
organisms.

If however somebody selects a single specimen from a species in nature (or
anywhere else) because of a striking character and he multiplies it into a
group of plants that follows the prerequisites of Distinction
(distinguishable from all other named selections of the species),
Uniformity (the groups of plants to be named is uniform throughout) and
Stability (the characteristics of the group remain after several cycles of
propagation) (= DUS-norm), then the group may be considered a cultivar
(cultivated variety) and named, registered and marketed as such.

Also in the realm of cultivars and trade it is unwanted to have an
explosion of cultivar-names, so if you have just 2 or so plants with a
typical character then it is not wise to try and register it with a
cultivar name.

There is MUCH more to this subject but that would require me to write a book.

Cheerio,
Wilbert

+More
From: "W. George Schmid" <hostahill at bellsouth.net> on 2007.03.14 at 08:11:33(15414)
Julius,
Some time ago we had an exchange on registering aroid cultivars in
accordance with the ICNCP (INTERNATIONAL CODE OF NOMENCLATURE FOR CULTIVATED
PLANTS 2004 edition). I made some suggestions and Derek worked on this also.
Perhaps we can refresh our previous conversations and efforts. The problem I
see in Araceae is to determine which aroids are valid taxa to be handled
under the ICBN and which are in fact cultivated varieties (man-made hybrids)
to be registered under the ICNCP. One of the problems we had under Hosta
were the numerous interspecific, natural hybrids existing in the wild. We
solved that problem by field investigations and accepted such hybrids as
taxa if perpetuating populations were found to exist in the wild. In some
cases, the holotypes were based on cultivated plants purportedly collected
in the wild, but lacking field verification were reduced to cultivars under
the ICNCP and so registered. From some of the earlier messages I deduce that
interspecific hybridization may also be a problem with aroids. To determine
synonymy, RAPD/DNA was employed to make the differentiations. That is an
expensive process, though. It seems to me that a number of aroids in
cultivation are not taxa (valid species) but culta (cultivars). George

W. George Schmid

+More
From: "Julius Boos" <ju-bo at msn.com> on 2007.03.15 at 14:33:21(15421)
Reply-To : Discussion of aroids
Sent : Thursday, March 15, 2007 12:14 AM
To : aroid-l@gizmoworks.com
Subject : RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms?

Dear aroid Friends,

First off, thanks to my friends George Schmid, Wilbert Hetterschied and
Alistair Hay for their most informative comments on registering cultivars.
I wrote to the L on behalf of Brian Williams, so hopefully he is better
informed on what registering a cultivar involves. I guesss the NEXT big
hurdle is---where does he register an aroid cultivar, with whom, and HOW
does he go about doing so!! :--)

Good Growing!

Julius

+More
From: "W. George Schmid" <hostahill at bellsouth.net> on 2007.03.15 at 15:20:50(15422)
Entirely correct,
Alistair,
There should be
+More
From: Brian Williams <pugturd at alltel.net> on 2007.03.15 at 16:36:41(15423)
This have been very informative. As you pointed out Alistair that some
form are already known as different clones. I forgotten all about the
different Alocasia lowii forms that are already out there. I am
surprised that this is not seen in other aroid groups as much?
As for the hybrids it would be very nice to be able to register them
with the society or at least some sort of data base so that in the
future they can help botanist and hobbyist ID their species or hybrids.
I have been breeding a lot of new Alocasias, Colocasias and other aroid
genera. I have been keeping good records of all my work. But if
something were to happen to me my data would be lost forever. I know
many people on the group are only are interested in species. The fact is
that their are already tons of hybrids and other forms out in the trade.
We have a data base for species and I think a data base for hybrids,
mutations and different forms would be very helpful. I think more of the
mainstream people grow more hybrids and colorful forms than they do
species. Helping keep the names and IDs correct on them could be very
useful for a larger group of people. Not only in keeping the parents
data and cultivar names but also keeping known hybrids from getting
mistaken for true species. Would be a big task but would be a nice
addition to the site. Just a thought.

+More
From: Brian Williams <pugturd at alltel.net> on 2007.03.15 at 17:23:02(15424)
Thanks already answering questions before I get them written down.
Julius as always extremely helpful even from the beginning of my
collecting days!!

+More
From: "Alistair Hay" <ajmhay at hotmail.com> on 2007.03.15 at 18:06:55(15425)
I hestitate, with Wilbert and Gearoge's great experience present here, to suggest how to move forward! But only briefly lol. I don't mind being shot down in flames and will probabkly learn something useful as I am currently up to the armpits in cultivar registration for another group (Brugmansia)
Given that this has got off to false starts, I would strongly advocate not trying to create an all-encompassing system first off: that looks to me as though it would all fall over again. Adopt the KISS principle and get something hapening which can be improved in time.
Also remember that cultivar registration is voluntary: if the system created is onerous and boring to to comply with, people won't.
An often-encountered misunderstanding is that cultivar registration is equivalent to cultivar naming, It is not. A cultivar can be named (i.e. the name formally established) in almost any form of publication (bar newspapers and a few other things (see 2004 Code)). So if you name a cv in a printed nursery catalogue and there is even a one-word description of it, and the publication is dated, the name is established provided it meets some other technical requirements (which most cultivar epithets do). Registration simply means that the ICRA accepts that the cultivar has been properly named somewhere and has incorporated it into its Register (which can be nothing more elaborate than an excel spreadsheet or even a scrap-book!). The Registration process is there to assist the ICRA in gathering the information it is responsible for managing.
1. As ICRA for Aroids IAS sh/could (I suggest) devote some pages ("ICRA pages") at the back of Aroideana to the publication of new cultivar names (if this is not happening already - sorry, I am out of touch!). Later these pages can also be used to publish determinations on the validity of names where issues arise that need a decision.
A simple format for publishing a new cv is
Amorphophallus 'Wilbert's Surprise' [PHOTO]
Seed parent: A. titanum (un-named clone); Pollen parent: A. prainii (un-named clone)
Hybridiser: George W. Bush; Seedling Parent [if different from hybridiser]: Tony Blair
[OR Discoverer: John Howard (if the cultivar has in effect been 'found' - in the wild, as an accidental seedling, as a sport etc]
Origin: USA; Introduced: 2006
Salient features: Spathe xxx, etc etc (keeping this to the minimum necessary to capture the distinctive points). Note: this may evolve into the bulk of a registration form designed around different genera/tribes, but I suggest do this when the need arises and when you know exactky why it is needed rather than designing elaborate registration forms up front.
Name established: here [or if publishng a cultivar whose name is established elsewhere, give the reference.]
IMO this covers the key stuff to start with.
If this (or something sinmilar) is adopted it may encourage people to publish cultuvars in Aroideana rather than in obscure price lists printed off a home PC - which is currently permitted under the 2004 Code and is a $%^&#@ nuisance!.
2. An online Register is set up to, at first, accommodate the new cultivars published in Aroideana with the same information and pics, and to which are added all established cultivar names in Araceae as they are gathered up by the Registrar and anyone assisting over time!
The online registry includes the template for publishing new cvs in Aroideana (outlined above), and Aroid-L, IAS website and perhaps Dave;s Garden are used to announce the deadlines for submission of new cultivars for establishmens in Aroideana each year. As the designated ICRA you are, I believe, responsible fior providing this service to members and non-members alike.
This seems to me to be the minimum necessary to make this work. I have not discussed nomenclatural standards and other recomendations of the Code, in the belief that f you try to do it all perfectly at once it all just seems too much!
Apologes if you have been over all this already!!
A
+More
From: Hermine <hermine at endangeredspecies.com> on 2007.03.18 at 11:47:05(15431)
may I have permission to quote your remarks on cultivar naming?
hermine
+More
From: "Wilbert Hetterscheid" <hetter at xs4all.nl> on 2007.03.19 at 09:44:51(15442)
Well, it is not my immediate business (the question is not
addressed to me), but this Australian Brugmansia guy is talking about
"gargantuan" Amorphophallus cultivar named after me.................
Somehow there is a (hardly) hidden hint in there. I will send a lawyer upon
everyone's feeble body who uses my name in dishonour.............and this lawyer
will clean you out in no time!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Wilbert

+More
From: "Alistair Hay" <ajmhay at hotmail.com> on 2007.03.19 at 13:44:55(15446)
Ummm, to whiom?? LOL

I hesitate, with Wilbert and Gearoge's great experience present here, to suggest how to move forward! But only briefly lol. I don't mind being shot down in flames and will probably learn something useful as I am currently up to the armpits in cultivar registration for another group (Brugmansia)Given that this has got off to false starts, I would strongly advocate not trying to create an all-encompassing system first off: that looks to me as though it would all fall over again. Adopt the KISS principle and get something happening which can be improved in time.Also remember that cultivar registration is voluntary: if the system created is onerous and boring to comply with, people won't.An often-encountered misunderstanding is that cultivar registration is equivalent to cultivar naming, It is not. A cultivar can be named (i.e.
the name formally established) in almost any form of publication (bar newspapers and a few other things (see 2004 Code)). So if you name a cv in a printed nursery catalogue and there is even a one-word description of it, and the publication is dated, the name is established provided it meets some other technical requirements (which most cultivar epithets do). Registration simply means that the ICRA accepts that the cultivar has been properly named somewhere and has incorporated it into its Register (which can be nothing more elaborate than an excel spreadsheet or even a scrap-book!). The Registration process is there to assist the ICRA in gathering the information it is responsible for managing.1. As ICRA for Aroids IAS sh/could (I suggest) devote some pages ("ICRA pages") at the back of Aroideana to the publication of new cultivar names (if this is not happening already -
sorry, I am out of touch!). Later these pages can also be used to publish determinations on the validity of names where issues arise that need a decision.A simple format for publishing a new cv is Amorphophallus 'Wilbert's Surprise' [PHOTO]Seed parent: A. titanum (un-named clone); Pollen parent: A. prainii (un-named clone)Hybridiser: George W. Bush; Seedling Parent [if different from hybridiser]: Tony Blair[OR Discoverer: John Howard (if the cultivar has in effect been 'found' - in the wild, as an accidental seedling, as a sport etc]Origin: USA; Introduced: 2006Salient features: Spathe xxx, etc etc (keeping this to the minimum necessary to capture the distinctive points). Note: this may evolve into the bulk of a
registration form designed around different genera/tribes, but I suggest do this when the need arises and when you know exactky why it is needed rather than designing elaborate registration forms up front.Name established: here [or if publishng a cultivar whose name is established elsewhere, give the reference.]IMO this covers the key stuff to start with.If this (or something sinmilar) is adopted it may encourage people to publish cultuvars in Aroideana rather than in obscure price lists printed off a home PC - which is currently permitted under the 2004 Code and is a $%^&#@ nuisance!.2. An online Register is set up to, at first, accommodate the new cultivars published in Aroideana with the same information and pics, and to which are added all established cultivar names in Araceae as they are gathered up by the Registrar and
anyone assisting over time!The online registry includes the template for publishing new cvs in Aroideana (outlined above), and Aroid-L, IAS website and perhaps Dave;s Garden are used to announce the deadlines for submission of new cultivars for establishmens in Aroideana each year. As the designated ICRA you are, I believe, responsible fior providing this service to members and non-members alike.This seems to me to be the minimum necessary to make this work. I have not discussed nomenclatural standards and other recomendations of the Code, in the belief that f you try to do it all perfectly at once it all just seems too much!Apologes if you have been over all this already!!A

+More
From: "Alistair Hay" <ajmhay at hotmail.com> on 2007.03.19 at 14:30:17(15447)
It was in honor of your MIND :-)

Well, it is not my immediate business (the question is not addressed to me), but this Australian Brugmansia guy is talking about "gargantuan" Amorphophallus cultivar named after me................. Somehow there is a (hardly) hidden hint in there. I will send a lawyer upon everyone's feeble body who uses my name in dishonour.............and this lawyer will clean you out in no time!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Wilbert

+More
From: "Wilbert Hetterscheid" <hetter at xs4all.nl> on 2007.03.19 at 23:13:27(15453)
I KNEW that, I KNEW that................

>It was in honor of your MIND

> Well, it is not my immediate business (the question
> is not addressed to me), but this Australian Brugmansia guy is talking
> about "gargantuan" Amorphophallus cultivar named after
> me................. Somehow there is a (hardly) hidden hint in there. I
> will send a lawyer upon everyone's feeble body who uses my name in
> dishonour.............and this lawyer will clean you out in no
> time!!!!!!!!!!!!!

>

> color=#0000ff size=2> 

>
> color=#0000ff size=2>Wilbert

>


>

>

> Van: aroid-l-bounces@gizmoworks.com
> [mailto:aroid-l-bounces@gizmoworks.com] Namens
>
Hermine
Verzonden: zondag 18 maart 2007 19:47
Aan:
> Discussion of aroids
Onderwerp: RE: [Aroid-l] Names for
> different forms?


>
may I have permission to quote your remarks on cultivar
> naming?

hermine

>

I hesitate, with Wilbert and Gearoge's
> great experience present here, to suggest how to move forward! But only
> briefly lol. I don't mind being shot down in flames and will probably
> learn something useful as I am currently up to the armpits in cultivar
> registration for another group (Brugmansia)

Given that this
> has got off to false starts, I would strongly advocate not trying to
> create an all-encompassing system first off: that looks to me as though it
> would all fall over again. Adopt the KISS principle and get something
> happening which can be improved in time.

Also remember that
> cultivar registration is voluntary: if the system created is onerous and
> boring to comply with, people won't.

An often-encountered
> misunderstanding is that cultivar registration is equivalent to cultivar
> naming, It is not. A cultivar can be named (i.e.
> the name formally established) in almost any form of publication (bar
> newspapers and a few other things (see 2004 Code)). So if you name a cv in
> a printed nursery catalogue and there is even a one-word description of
> it, and the publication is dated, the name is established provided it
> meets some other technical requirements (which most cultivar epithets do).
> Registration simply means that the ICRA accepts that the cultivar has been
> properly named somewhere and has incorporated it into its Register (which
> can be nothing more elaborate than an excel spreadsheet or even a
> scrap-book!). The Registration process is there to assist the ICRA in
> gathering the information it is responsible for managing.

1. As
> ICRA for Aroids IAS sh/could (I suggest) devote some pages ("ICRA pages")
> at the back of Aroideana to the publication of new cultivar names
>
(if this is not happening already -
> sorry, I am out of touch!). Later these pages can also be used to publish
> determinations on the validity of names where issues arise that need a
> decision.

A simple format for publishing a new cv is
>

Amorphophallus 'Wilbert's Surprise'  
> [PHOTO]

Seed parent: A. titanum (un-named clone);
> Pollen parent: A. prainii (un-named
> clone)

Hybridiser: George W. Bush; Seedling Parent
> [if different from hybridiser]: Tony Blair

[OR
> Discoverer: John Howard (if the cultivar has in effect been 'found'
> - in the wild, as an accidental seedling, as a sport
> etc]

Origin: USA; Introduced: 2006

Salient
> features:
Spathe xxx, etc etc (keeping this to the minimum necessary
> to capture the distinctive points). Note: this may evolve into
> the bulk of a
> registration form designed around different genera/tribes, but I
> suggest do this when the need arises and when you know exactky why it is
> needed rather than designing elaborate registration forms up
> front.

Name established: here [or if publishng a
> cultivar whose name is established elsewhere, give the
> reference.]

IMO this covers the key stuff to start with.

If
> this (or something sinmilar) is adopted it may encourage people to publish
> cultuvars in Aroideana rather than in obscure price lists printed off a
> home PC - which is currently permitted under the 2004 Code and is a
> $%^&#@ nuisance!.

2. An online Register is set up to, at first,
> accommodate the new cultivars published in Aroideana with the same
> information and pics, and to which are added all established cultivar
> names in Araceae as they are gathered up by the Registrar and
> anyone assisting over time!

The online registry includes the
> template for publishing new cvs in Aroideana (outlined above), and
> Aroid-L, IAS website and perhaps Dave;s Garden are used to announce the
> deadlines for submission of new cultivars for establishmens in Aroideana
> each year. As the designated ICRA you are, I believe, responsible fior
> providing this service to members and non-members alike.

This seems
> to me to be the minimum necessary to make this work. I have not discussed
> nomenclatural standards and other recomendations of the Code, in the
> belief that f you try to do it all perfectly at once it all just seems too
> much!

Apologes if you have been over all this
> already!!

A

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

>

>

From:  "Julius Boos" <ju-bo@msn.com>

>

Reply-To:  Discussion of aroids
> <aroid-l@gizmoworks.com>

>

To:  aroid-l@gizmoworks.com

>

Subject:  RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms?

>

Date:  Thu, 15 Mar 2007 21:33:21 +0000

>

>

>

>

>

>>From : Alistair Hay <ajmhay@hotmail.com>

>

>Reply-To : Discussion of aroids <aroid-l@gizmoworks.com>

>

>Sent : Thursday, March 15, 2007 12:14 AM

>

>To : aroid-l@gizmoworks.com

>

>Subject : RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms?

>

>

>

>Dear aroid Friends,

>

>

>

>First off, thanks to my friends George Schmid, Wilbert
> Hetterschied

>

>and Alistair Hay for their most informative comments on
> registering

>

>cultivars.

>

>I wrote to the L on behalf of Brian Williams, so hopefully he is
>

>

>better informed on what registering a cultivar
> involves.   I guesss

>

>the NEXT big hurdle is---where does he register an aroid cultivar,
>

>

>with whom, and HOW does he go about doing so!!  :--)

>

>

>

>Good Growing!

>

>

>

>Julius

>

>

>

>Pared down to the basics, the only salient part of a cultivar that
>

>

>comes under the ICBN is the genus. The cultivar name at the
> minimum

>

>consists of the genus name and the cv epithet.

>

>

>

>It does not matter all that much whether the plant is a selected
>

>

>man-made hybrid or a selection from  a wild species or a
> selection

>

>from a natural hybrid population. The thing that is to be named is
> a

>

>clone, selected for some merit, within a genus.

>

>

>

>Thus: the gargantuan white-spathed Amorphophallus 'Wilbert's

>

>Surprise' can be  defined, named, established and registered
>

>

>provided it is distinct from other cultivars of Amorphophallus,
>

>

>uniform and stable  regardless of what species or hybrid it
> is. Of

>

>course it would be nice to have the information that it is an f2
>

>

>hybrid of A. titanum and A. prainii, but that it not a necessary
>

>

>piece of information to name the cv. [I have made this example up,
>

>

>just in case anyone was wondering!].

>

>

>

>The sort of problem that George raises would, I think, arise in
>

>

>specific circumstances where there was an intention to transfer a
>

>

>latin botanical epithet into a cultivar name. This can only be
> done

>

>where the entire taxon is a clone. A possible example is Aliocasia
>

>

>zebrina var tigrina: If it can be demonstrated that var. tigrina
> is

>

>a clone then that botanical varietal epithet can become the
> cultivar

>

>epithet as in Alocasia 'Tigrina'. If it is not clear whether var.
>

>

>tigrina is a clone then there are simpler solutions than DNA and
>

>

>field analysis. Either don't transfer the latin epithet at all, or
>

>

>translate it into a contemporary language e.g. Alocasia 'Tigrine'
>

>

>applied to the cultivated clone known now as "tigrina". That way
> the

>

>exact status of the botanical variety does not need to be found
> out

>

>at all, while a familiar name (slightly adjusted) can be retained
> as

>

>a cultivar epithet.

>

>

>

>What I am getting at is that the issues which George raises, while
>

>

>valid, should not necessarily create the impression of vast
> hurdles

>

>to getting things going with Aroid cv classifictaion.

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>Alistair

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>    From:  "W. George Schmid"
> <hostahill@bellsouth.net>

>

>    Reply-To:  Discussion of aroids
> <aroid-l@gizmoworks.com>

>

>    To:  "'Discussion of aroids'"
> <aroid-l@gizmoworks.com>

>

>    Subject:  RE: [Aroid-l] Names for
> different forms?

>

>    Date:  Wed, 14 Mar 2007 11:11:33 -0400

>

>    >

+More
From: Hermine <hermine at endangeredspecies.com> on 2007.03.20 at 03:17:20(15454)
At 01:44 PM 3/19/2007, you wrote:
Ummm, to whiom??
LOL
my sansevieria list which gets somewhat agitated over the whole issue of
cultivar names. agitated and NERVOUS. I thought your take on the whole
thimg was refreshing.

Reply-To: Discussion of aroids

To: Discussion of aroids

Subject: RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms?

Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2007 11:47:05 -0700

may I have permission to quote your remarks on cultivar
naming?

hermine

+More
From: piaba <piabinha at yahoo.com> on 2007.03.21 at 08:07:41(15459)
these are fighting words, my friend, i hope you know
that.

Brugmansia, of course...

+More
From: "Alistair Hay" <ajmhay at hotmail.com> on 2007.03.22 at 13:59:21(15465)
You are welcome to do so. But I suggest first seeking Wilbert's opinion as Lord High Chamberlain of Coltonomy!

Ummm, to whiom?? LOLmy sansevieria list which gets somewhat agitated over the whole issue of cultivar names. agitated and NERVOUS. I thought your take on the whole thimg was refreshing.

Reply-To: Discussion of aroids
To: Discussion of aroids
Subject: RE: [Aroid-l] Names for different forms?
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2007 11:47:05 -0700
may I have permission to quote your remarks on cultivar naming?
hermine

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