Re: Phymatarum

From: "Julius Boos" <ju-bo at EMAIL.MSN.COM> on 1998.05.31 at 14:14:04(2213) Dear Bob, I will hazard an "educated guess" as to why Phymatarum ( an Ariod!) did not appear on the list in the genera of Araceae (can someone, Peter, Simon, back me up?)-- this genus is one of a previously confusing group from the same geographical area (Piptospatha Brown 1879, re-worked by Engler 1912 and Hotta 1965; Hottarum Bogner & Nicolson 1979 (originally discribed as Microcasia truncata by Hotta); Bucephalandra Schott 1858, re-worked by Engler 1912, Bogner 1980, 1984, Boyce 1995, Boyce Bogner and Mayo 1995; Phymatarum Hotta 1965, then reviewed by Bogner 1984; Aridarum Ridley 1913, reviewed by Engler and Krause in 1920, Hotta in 1965, and by Bogner in 1976, 1981 and 1983; and Heteroaridarum Hotta 1976) that appear superficially similar, and some genera have only recently been discribed or re-worked, so in the "confusion" this (then doubtful) genus was not included in the list, but is certainly included on the list in the wonderful volume, "The Genera of Araceae", 1997. I am sure the list on our web site will be amended to include this now valid genus. We have to remember that Science is ever changing as new information comes to light due to research being carried out as we speak. Cheers, Julius. +More ju-bo@msn.com Why does the genus Phymatarum not appear listed on the "genera of Aracea" page of the IAS website? It is listed as a valid genus name with two species in Borneo in A DICTIONARY OF THE FLOWERING PLANTS AND FERNS, J.C.Willis. Admittedly I have only the 8th ed., but was Phymatarum declared NOT an aroid?; is there a valid synonym?

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