The horticultural industry has for years referred to hybrid Anthuriums as being Anthurium andraeanum, which is a wild plant from Ecuador and Columbia.

The correct term for most of those hybrids should be Anthurium X cultorum.

http://www.aroid.org/TAP/speci...

Aloha, Dave

This is an interesting dilemma. We have so many cultivar entries with A. andraeanum as their species name, in addition to the A. andraeanum species entry. Unless those cultivars are a cross of andraeanum with andraeanum, the species will have to be deleted from the entry names.

http://garden.org/plants/searc...

I'm interested in hearing what @eclayne sees as the best solution. I don't think we can have an entry called Anthurium x cultorum because I don't see it listed as a valid species name in any taxonomic database.

As described by the Aroid Society the wild Anthurium andraeanum has a viney epiphytic habit, while the hybrids are suckering clumpers.

You couldn't cross any species with itself and call it a hybrid.

The Anthurium andraeanum hybrids involve other species. The reason the naming authorities don't list something like Anthurium X cultorum is because it's not a natural species.

It seems right that if the plant is a known named hybrid it's epithet would look something like Anthurium 'Cultivar'.

If a cultivar name is not known then Anthurium X cultorum, as the Aroid Society suggests, would make sense.

Unless Anthurium andraeanum can be shown as a vine growing up a tree, it should not be believable. The term should not be used to describe the clumping plants, which like to grow around the base of trees, that we are used to.

Thanks for the information and link Dave. Many of the A. andraeanum cvs. in our db are patented plants with A. andreanum (orthographic variant of A. andraeanum) noted as their parentage. Neil Carroll explains that use nicely in the link you provided. We can either delete the species epithet altogether, as Zuzu suggests, or replace it with x cultorum.

As for using A. x cultorum, I'm unsure. Carroll notes

..many in fact are hybrids of several closely related species in section Calomystrium...

GRIN notes A. x cultorum as a synonym of A. x ferrierense, a simple hybrid cross of A. andraeanum x A. nymphaeifolium. I've located a copy of The Cultivated Aroids, Birdsey not too far from here so I'd like to compare that description to the one in the GRIN. If you know of an online copy please let me know.

Regardless, changes will be made and I appreciate your bringing this to our attention. I'll report back with what I find.

Hi Evan,

I'm familiar with Anthurium x ferrierense, I was figuring that the Aroid Society uses Anthurium X cultorum as a way to blanket all hybrids involving Anthurium andraeanum, especially if both parents aren't known. If the hybrid is known to be Anthurium x ferrierense, with includes a large amount of the large spathed cultivars, (Hawaiian authors use A. x f. for the bulk of garden Anthurium.) that term should be used as the parents are known.

Perhaps the Aroid Society should be contacted for their take on proper naming.

http://www.aroid.org/TAP/index...

http://www.aroid.org/

This is all starting to confuse me!

Aloha, Dave

Metrosideros said:Perhaps the Aroid Society should be contacted for their take on proper naming.

Thanks Dave, I'll do that.

zuzu said:This is an interesting dilemma. We have so many cultivar entries with A. andraeanum as their species name, in addition to the A. andraeanum species entry. Unless those cultivars are a cross of andraeanum with andraeanum, the species will have to be deleted from the entry names.

I realize that this part of my response may have sounded confusing or even facetious. I was trying to explain the naming standards we use in our database. If a cultivar is the result of a cross between two species, we don't list the species, so the entries for the cultivars presently listed with A. andraeanum in their names would have to be edited to remove the species name.

It seems that removing the andraeanum from all of the entries of hybrids would be efficient. Many of the cultivar entries are that way already. The typical Anthurium andraeanum entry might be changed to Anthurium x ferrierense to reflect any common large spathe types with unknown names. Unknowns with unusual spathe & spadix, maybe Anthurium X cultorum?

Also the Anthurium scandens 'Purple' entry is completely off, it is certainly not that species. If it does match up with a 'Purple' cultivar it might be displayed as Anthurium 'Purple', unless it is a duplicate entry.



http://images.search.yahoo.com...

There is no other entry named 'Purple," so Evan could remove the scandens species name from that entry without running into any conflicts.

Anthurium x ferrierense seems to be as "iffy" as Anthurium x cultorum. Both names are ignored by the Catalogue of Life and both are listed on The Plant List only as unresolved names. If all of the photos in the Anthurium andraeanum entry are in the wrong place, it might be best to simply move them to the generic Anthuriums page, where all of the other photos of unidentified anthurium hybrids currently reside.

Thanks Zuzu.

I guess I wasn't getting that you already had a commonplace page for Anthuriums. Yes the Anthurium andraeanum type page should go there.

There should be a new entry though, that depicts Anthurium andraeanum, as the native plant, which is a vining epiphyte, from Ecuador and Columbia, which has moderately sized red-orange spathes. So far no photos.

Aloha, Dave

In the method I described, the entry for A. andraeanum would stay put. The photos would be moved from that page to the main page for the genus. Then all we'd have to do is hope that we can get some "real" photos of A. andraeanum someday.

You and Evan could keep an eye on that entry now and then to make sure that no new photos of imposters show up there.

Anyone want to go to Ecuador!

Count me in Dave.

zuzu said:I realize that this part of my response may have sounded confusing or even facetious. I was trying to explain the naming standards we use in our database. If a cultivar is the result of a cross between two species, we don't list the species, so the entries for the cultivars presently listed with A. andraeanum in their names would have to be edited to remove the species name.

If A. x cultorum describes several undefined species in it's parentage, which seems likely, then I don't see a place for it in the database either. I believe A. x ferrierense should be treated differently. My understanding is that taxonomic databases like the Kew World Checklist, the database referenced by the COL and The Plant List for Araceae, often don't fully address hybrids of horticultural origin. They do address wild species crosses. A. x ferrierense is listed by both Croat on the IAS site and by CATE Araceae, meaning the name is validly published for that cross. I treat all species crosses noted as unplaced +/or of horticultural origin similarly e.g., they need back-up, hopefully by an ICRA.

I've removed A. scandens 'Purple' from the database altogether since I haven't found any references to it.

zuzu said:In the method I described, the entry for A. andraeanum would stay put. The photos would be moved from that page to the main page for the genus. Then all we'd have to do is hope that we can get some "real" photos of A. andraeanum someday.

This is a pretty good system Dave. For instance if you look at any genus only entry you'll often see numerous photos, some of which have a known ID and some of which don't. Unidentified varieties of a known species are often placed in the species entry as well.

After pompously dispensing this advice, I was embarrassed to see that the Hibiscus Database, of which I am the moderator, had lots of photos of unidentified hybrids in the entry for Hibiscus rosa-sinensis, which should be reserved for the species Hibiscus and its synonym, H. storckii. I quickly moved all of the photos of hybrids to the generic Hibiscus page.

Zuzu - I hope you realize that probably 95% of those here at ATP would never have known that unless you told us! Don't think I'll remember it by morning!

Whew! What a relief. Thanks, Pirlie.

I read threads like this hoping the knowledge will magically sink in and adhere to my memory bank...but I dream. It's not about to happen but I do enjoy seeing how problems or issues are resolved with such amity.

@Dave, Can you script a batch photo move for me?
Move all photos in Flamingo Flower (Anthurium andraeanum)
to 538637, Anthuriums (Anthurium)

Thanks

@eclayne this is done. 52 images were moved.

Thanks Dave!! I wouldn't have bothered you but my av software's latest problem has me crawling. Time for a switch.