----- Original Message -----|
To: 'Discussion of aroids'
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 10:16
Subject: RE: [Aroid-l] Philodendron
domesticum vs. Philodendron hastatum
Thanks for the info Steve. Since there is no
authentication process associated with posting on many sites large or not, it
is up to each individual to make up his or her mind on what is valid out there
and what is not. I have, in the past, posted on the site in question and I
certainly am no expert. Most site like this are rife with
misidentifications. Believe me I know since I like to collect Dischidias and
there is little or no good info out there for them.
I did take the opportunity to change my tag after reading
the discussion and have noted the change on my site.
[mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf Of Steve Lucas Exotic
RainforestSent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 9:58 AMTo:
Discussion of aroidsSubject: [Aroid-l] Philodendron domesticum vs.
If anyone has a documented photo of Philodendron
domesticum G.S. Bunting I'd love to see the plant! And I'd love to
know where this species originated.
Some of you may recall our discussion last summer regarding
"Philodendron glaucophyllum". Many were not excited to read Dr. Croat's
explanation that name is fictitious and "made-up" name for
Philodendron hastatum. I corresponded with both Dr. Croat and
Dr. Gonçalves at length regarding this Brazilian species. During my
search for information I began to run across quite a few internet
notations claiming Philodendron hastatum was "formerly known as"
Philodendron domesticum. Dr. Croat provided excellent reasoning
why this is not possible. P. hastatum was identified 112 years
before P. domesticum therefore, assuming these were the same plant,
P. hastatum would the name of preference and P.
domesticum would be the synonym. Still, many websites make a claim
to the contrary.
In my internet description of the species I included their
claims, which I still believe to be in error. In doing so I listed the
names of two websites that had made that claim. I did not attempt to
claim they were bad websites, quite the contrary, I described one as "an
excellent" website. That one was a large garden website and the other
was a county extension agent. But I've also found the claim on the USDA
website and quite a few others! Last week I received a letter from the
garden website's attorney telling me to remove my claim they were in error or
face legal action. So I removed their name. I didn't remove the
facts provided by Dr. Croat that P. hastatum is the correct
name. I'm not sure if that is all they wanted done so we'll see if I
actually get sued for claiming P. hastatum is the real
I cannot find much information on P.
domesticum. The photos on the internet (which cannot be verified)
appear to be a totally different species. If anyone has a verified photo
of P. domesticum I'd love to see it! I won't make the mistake
of ever saying a large corporation is in error scientifically again on my
site! Apparently that particular site recently sold to a large magazine
and it appears the new owner does not want to have their facts called into
question. But I won't change the correct name facts which appear to be
scientifically accurate either! The link to my page is
--No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by
AVG Free Edition.Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.18.3/693 - Release
Date: 2/19/2007 5:01 PM
--No virus found in this outgoing message.Checked by
AVG Free Edition.Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.18.3/694 - Release
Date: 2/20/2007 1:44 PM
Aroid-l mailing list