I think this may be Hosta sieboldii rather than H. sieboldiana. I know, it's confusing when two species in the same genus were named for the same person, but H. sieboldiana has large, heart-shaped leaves, while those of H. sieboldii are smaller and lanceolate.

And in this pic, I think the label actually says "H. sieboldii var...." something beginning with a "y".

:-)

~Christopher

It might say Hosta kikutii var. yakusimensis, which is now a synonym for Hosta sieboldiana var. sieboldiana. It looks like this photo of H. kikutii var. yakusimensis.

http://gardenbreizh.org/photos...

I disagree. While this isn't my original thought -- H. sieboldii -- it's also not what is considered H. sieboldiana. Once, back when the species pictured was previously described, it was called H. sieboldiana var. yakusimensis, but it has since been given its own species name. These pictures should, therefore, be sent to a file for the current name -- H. kikutii var. yakusimensis -- and its previous synonym of H. sieboldiana var. yakusimensis can be referenced there. They don't belong in a file for H. sieboldiana.

Note the dates when it was included within H. sieboldiana.
http://www.hostalibrary.org/sp...

More recent references to this species no longer lump it with H. sieboldiana.
http://www.hostalibrary.org/sp...

I actually hadn't heard of this species before -- instead, I was looking up H. sieboldiana 'Elegans' for my cemetery project. While searching around, I stumbled upon this trio of pics which seemed out of place. In the process, I learned about a new (to me) plant.

:-)

~Christopher

As I already said, Hosta kikutii var. yakusimensis is a synonym. We do not have separate entries for synonyms because they are obsolete names.

http://www.catalogueoflife.org...

Your links are dated 2008 and 2010. Mine is dated 2018 and shows that the latest taxonomic scrutiny was performed in August 2017.

If the Catalogue of Life changes the classification of these names in the future, our database entries will be updated to reflect these changes.

I find it interesting that your link does have an entry for Hosta kikutii, but did not move one of its accepted variants over into that species, leaving it back with H. sieboldiana, where it was last referenced as such (according to the website's own references) in 1932.

http://www.catalogueoflife.org...

Then there's a 1940 reference listing it with H. kikutii.

http://www.catalogueoflife.org...

And it's odd that all the other variants of H. kikutii -- which were all once lumped with H. sieboldiana -- made their way to a new file, but this one variant -- which is still clustered with the other H. kikutii variants in my much more recent references -- was left behind.

No disrespect meant, but when a more recent link (2018) is supported by a much older reference (1930s) than 2008 and 2010 references, methinks the 2018 link simply hasn't been updated.

http://www.catalogueoflife.org...

Besides, simply look at the photos and compare them to all the others in the file -- they're not the same.

:-)

~Christopher

Looking at photos is not a good basis for taxonomic classification. External differences are largely irrelevant in taxonomy. Great Danes and Chihuahuas, for instance, are of the same species, and think of the differences between male and female birds of the same species, or Homo sapiens for that matter.

Hi Christopher,

Thought I might add my comments to try to clarify the situation.

As Zuzu has already said, Hosta kikutii var. yakusimensis is now a synonym for Hosta sieboldiana var. sieboldiana.

The Catalogue of Life literature references for Hosta sieboldiana var. yakusimensis (1932) and Hosta kikutii var. yakusimensis (1940) are the publication dates of those names. If you look closely, the latter references exactly the same publication as your link http://www.hostalibrary.org/sp... (which also mentions the 1932 name as a synonym). So far, no disagreement between the Hosta Library and COL.

As Zuzu has already pointed out, though, the Hosta Library document is dated 2010 and the COL update is 2017. From this we can conclude that between 2010 and 2017 Hosta kikutii var. yakusimensis was merged into Hosta sieboldiana var. sieboldiana. The COL uses KEW's World Checklist of Selected Plants as its source for this genus; as you can see, Hosta kikutii var. yakusimensis is no longer accepted; instead, it is a synonym for Hosta sieboldiana var. sieboldiana. The details given indicate that this change was published in 2016 in the Flora of Japan.

Australis said:Hi Christopher,

Thought I might add my comments to try to clarify the situation.

As Zuzu has already said, Hosta kikutii var. yakusimensis is now a synonym for Hosta sieboldiana var. sieboldiana.

The Catalogue of Life literature references for Hosta sieboldiana var. yakusimensis (1932) and Hosta kikutii var. yakusimensis (1940) are the publication dates of those names. If you look closely, the latter references exactly the same publication as your link http://www.hostalibrary.org/sp... (which also mentions the 1932 name as a synonym). So far, no disagreement between the Hosta Library and COL.

As Zuzu has already pointed out, though, the Hosta Library document is dated 2010 and the COL update is 2017. From this we can conclude that between 2010 and 2017 Hosta kikutii var. yakusimensis was merged into Hosta sieboldiana var. sieboldiana. The COL uses KEW's World Checklist of Selected Plants as its source for this genus; as you can see, Hosta kikutii var. yakusimensis is no longer accepted; instead, it is a synonym for Hosta sieboldiana var. sieboldiana. The details given indicate that this change was published in 2016 in the Flora of Japan.

So then you say that all the photos of what you consider Hosta sieboldiana var. sieboldiana are accurately represented within this file -- despite the three pictures on which I commented not matching the others, yet all are the same "var. sieboldiana"...........


You know what, despite other references I'm finding which repeat what I've been echoing -- that while the names may be synonyms, the PREFERRED name for this is under H. kikutii, as it's not the same as H. sieboldiana -- this isn't my plant database, and it's not up to me to correct it. However, I still don't understand how anyone with eyes can't see that the three photos I tagged are clearly different plants from all the rest in this file. But, again, it's not my database, so carry on.

:-)

~Christopher

AquaEyes said:So then you say that all the photos of what you consider Hosta sieboldiana var. sieboldiana are accurately represented within this file -- despite the three pictures on which I commented not matching the others, yet all are the same "var. sieboldiana"...........

I am not familiar enough with Hostas to confirm the identity of the plant in the photos you mention. All I can tell you is that Hosta kikutii var. yakusimensis has been merged into Hosta sieboldiana var. sieboldiana and so as long as the plant marker shown in the photo associated with this thread is correct, the photo is in the right place. Please note that there is a difference between a taxonomical issue (which we have been discussing) and a labelling issue.

By the way, significant variation within a species (or even subspecies) is not unheard of; Martagon Lily (Lilium martagon var. martagon) is a good example of this.