Re: The correct name for Arisaema consanguineum

From: grsjr at juno.com (George R Stilwell, Jr.) on 1997.02.21 at 17:10:37(409) Peter, I quite agree on the dates of the original citations for A. consanguineum (1859) and A. erubascens (1832). However, are they indeed the same plant? Udai Pradhan, in his 1990 book, shows significant differences in flower structure, leaflet number and shape, spathe color and shape, etc. I suspect the original citations do as well. Thus from this evidence I would have to conclude that, even though closely related and often confused, they are not the same plant and thus both names are valid. Perhaps you have other evidence to show the differences are not valid? Ray +More GRSJr@Juno.com

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