Talk:Alocasia × mortfontanensis

From Wikispecies
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Issues[edit]

Alocasia Amazonica as we know it today was not described to science by botanist Éduard François André (1840-1911) as is indicated on at least one Wiki page. In fact, Alocasia Amazonica is not a species and has never been described to science.

The name should never be used in italics. Feel free to check the Royal Botanic Garden Kew website the International Plant Names Index http://www.ipni.org/index.html , the Missouri Botanical Garden website TROPICOS http://www.tropicos.org/ or the World Checklist of Selected Plant Families http://apps.kew.org/wcsp/qsearch.do. The name cannot be found on any scientific source.

Alocasia Amazonica originated in a plant nursery in Miami, FL in the 1950's as a hybrid plant. The nursery owner was named Salvadore Mauro who was a Miami post man and was called the Amazon Nursery. The hybrid was named after the nursery, not the Amazon Basin in South America. It has never been observed naturally in any rain forest anywhere in the world.

The plant was hybridized by crossing Alocasia watsoniana x Alocasia sanderiana.

There are no Alocasia species found naturally in South and Central America or the Caribbean although many species grow there now. All were imported from either Southeast Asia or the neighboring Pacific Ocean islands, especially the Philippines and set free. None of the more than 100 species of Alocasia grow naturally outside their natural region.

André appears to have written in 1891 in Review Hortic about an an Alocasia hybrid between Alocasia sanderiana and Alocasia lowii. Alocasia lowii is now correctly Alocasia longiloba. Those parents were later ascribed to Alocasia Amazonica in error since the parents of that plant are Alocasia sanderiana x Alocasia watsoniana. As far as I can tell André referred to the plant as "mortefontanensis".

It is beginning to appear André's mortefontanensis had the same parents as the plant sold as Alocasia Polly. If that is true then André's plant is not the same hybrid as Salvadore Mauro's plant bred at his Amazon Nursery in Miami. That would lead me to believe that Alocasia Polly and Alocasia Amazonica should not be confused as the same plant.

It also appears some unidentified researcher elected to call André's mortefontanensis Alocasia x amazonica due to the popularity of the hybrid plant with growers when in fact it should still be called Alocasia x mortefontanensis or something on that order.

It makes no sense for a well known European hybrid which I have now been told has been grown since the late 1800's or early 1900's to be called Alocasia x amazonica when the reason for the use of the name "Amazonica" is obvious due to the name of Salvadore Mauro's nursery.

This note arrived form Australian aroid botanist Alistair Hay who is one of the world experts in the genus


I don't know much about "A. x amazonica" though it appears not to be a validly published botanical name. I am not aware of the name going back before the 1950's, though the hybrid plant might well go back to the 19th century (and been re-made later), as there were many hybrids made then. Plants have sometimes been given completely erroneous geographic epithets, like the Asian Lycoris africana, and the African Nerine sarniensis, to take two examples from Amaryllidaceae, but I think the origin being the name of the nursery may be correct in this case. IMO the IAS as ICRA for aroids should publish a determination that "Alocasia x amazonica" is the correctly cultivar Alocasia 'Amazonica'.

By the way, the Alocasia nobilis your ?Belgian correspondent refers to is an illegitimate name because of the prior A. nobilis Hallier f. (an unrelated Sumatran species). 'Nobilis' cannot be used as a cultivar epithet in Alocasia (for a form of A. sanderiana) because of the existence of Alocasia nobilis Hallier f., if my interpretation of the ICNCP is correct.

I remember agonizing over whether to include A. watsoniana in the A. longiloba complex. He hasn't grown enough of the variable plants in the complex, I suspect. What look like different species in cultivation become much more blurred if one looks (at more variability) in the wild. I suspect the cultivated big watsoniana should also be given the status of cultivar, Alocasia 'Watsoniana'. Many of these problems with and unending arguments/discussions about "horticultural-botanical" hybrids and species can be simply circumvented by making them cultivars.


This note followed from Belgium:

I have checked at my book and effectively,the plant described in 1891 by Ed Andre is Alocasia mortfontanensis, as john Banta write it in your reply. I have grown this plant years ago and it seem that there are no really apparent difference from the plant know as Alocasia x amazonica like we all know today,except that the leaves are typically more large in A x mortfontanensis. This plant was not from a Belgian grower as i mentioned before,but from a French grower (MM Chantrier) and is said to be from 1891. The parents were Alocasia lowii 'grandis' by Alocasia sanderiana. So John Banta is probably correct. The cross 'amazonica' is probably from America. For your information, the plant in the living collection in The Belgian Botanical Garden of Meise is 'only' a common Alocasia x 'amazonica'....I know it well as they got the plant from me years ago in an plant exchange exercise!


More facts on this hybrid plant can be read here:

http://www.exoticrainforest.com/Alocasia%20micholitziana%20%20pc.html

For scientifically accurate information regarding Alocasia species please read A review of Alocasia (Araceae: Colocasieae) for Thailand including a novel species and new species records from South-West Thailand by Peter C. Boyce. http://www.aroid.org/genera/alocasia/alocthailand.pdf

On November 16, 2009 the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) elected to change the information on its website to no longer indicate Alocasia x amazonica should be credited to André:

http://www.ars-grin.gov/cgi-bin/npgs/html/taxon.pl?312551

They now indicate the plant is only a horticultural name.

November 19, 2009: Information provided this afternoon by Geneviève Ferry in France makes it clearer André's plant was never described as Alocasia x amazonica as is often reported.

Geneviève is a works at the botanical garden in Nancy, France and is a regular on Aroid l. She sent a copy of the original of André's work. She was kind enough to give me the "play by play" since I couldn't make the document open. Her information came from the library at the botanical garden at Nancy, France. I

André's hybrid was published in Revue Horticole in 1891, not Revue Hortic as I originally posted. The plant was crossed by the brothers Chantrier who were gardeners at Mortefontaine and they used Alocasia lowii and Alocasia sanderiana as the parent plants. André published the plant using the name "mortefontanensis". Since Alocasia lowii is now correctly known as a natural variation of Alocasia longiloba the plant would technically have the same parents as the plant created in Miami by Salvadore Mauro since he used A. watsoniana Hort.x Alocasia sanderiana Hort. Alocasia watsoniana is also a synonym of Alocasia longiloba Miq.

Even though two of the parents look different they are genetically the same species which makes this terribly confusing and difficult for anyone that does not study plant species to rapidly grasp. However, André never referred to the plant as Alocasia x amazonica.

The two hybrids are technically one and the same which would easily lead a researcher to give credit to André for the hybrid but the name Alocasia Amazonica belongs to Salvadore Mauro and it is strictly my opinion he should have credit for that name he coined, not André.

I have no desire to not give André credit or the brothers Chantrier for their work which was published more than 100 years ago. I simply believe Salvadore Mauro should have the honor of having his name associated with the name he created. André should also have credit for his paper on the Alocasia hybrid he called "mortefontanensis".

Since I was reminded this morning this is simply a " mere tempest in a teapot".I'm done!


The information from this point and above was submitted by Steve Lucas, www.ExoticRainforest.com, Corresponding Secretary for the International Aroid Society. I have no idea who submitted the information below.



.André seems to have validated several nothospecific Alocasia in Revue Horticole and Alocasia amazonica might be one of them. I don't have access to this journal so I can't check.The fact that it's not listed in the IPNI or Tropicos is not a guarantee is does not excist. Epibase 01:26, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I had a reply from IPNI confirming the name is invalid. However, IPNI have contacted an Araceae specialist about validating the name since it is in general use. So why not keep it here for a while? I've moved to to the more proper Alocasia ×amazonica. Epibase 22:05, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PLACE OF PUBLICATION? Can anyone tell me where Mauro published A. x amazonica ? Was it in his own nursery catalogue ? (anybody know page and year ?--Weepingraf 14:18, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow editors,

I have just modified 1 external links on Alocasia × amazonica. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:48, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow editors,

I have just modified 1 external links on Alocasia × amazonica. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:29, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong picture[edit]

Hi, there is Heliconia inflorescence on the picture, not Alocasia. Vojtěch Zavadil (talk) 22:41, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The image is held on Wikidata; it can be changed (or disputed) there. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 00:31, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://species.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Alocasia_×_mortfontanensis&oldid=8016228"