Re[2]: Colocasia & Alocasia winter storage temp

From: alistair_hay at rbgsyd.gov.au on 1998.12.14 at 03:32:20(2817) Dan Nicolson (Flora Vitiensis Nova 1, 1979) and I (Sandakania 7, 1996) came to the conclusion that subspecies and botanical varieties of Colocasia esculenta are pretty meaningless. The whole thing (wild types and cultivars) should botanically just be called C. esculenta, and diversity of cultivated forms reflected in cultivar and cultivar group nomenclature set up within the domain of the International Code of Nomenclature for Cultivated Plants - an interesting little job for someone.....! Alistair +More ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ Subject: Re: Colocasia & Alocasia winter storage temp Author: at mailgate Date: 12/11/98 8:43 AM S > So, am I again behind on nomenclature? Last I heard, C. antiquorum ("eddoe") > was a subspecies of C. esculenta ("taro"). > > Jason Hernandez So? That doesn't mean every subspecies has the same characteristics. I'll be the first one to admit I'm not sure of the nomenclature, but there are several that have fleshy tubers, are stoloniferous and do *not* do well in bare root storage. Two of these include a purple-stemmed colocasia and also one that has green leaves heavily covered with irregular purple blotches. I have seen these referred to as Colocasia fontanesii and Colocasia antiquroum "Illustris", respectively. We can leave nomenclature to the true experts, but if I'm wrong on these names, so are a lot of people. Clarence

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