I just read the paper:
A phylogeny of the Areae (Araceae) implies that Typhonium, Sauromatum, and the Australian species of Typhonium are distinct clades
by: Cusimano, Natalie; Barrett, Matthew D; Hetterscheid, Wilbert L.A.; and Renner, Susanne S.
in Taxon, Volume 59, Number 2, April 2010 , pp. 439-447(9)
This establishes with molecular data, and morhological support, that the plant we may know as Sauromatum guttatum, is properly: Sauromatum venosum (Dryand. ex Ait.) Kunth ... and it does not belong in Typhonium.
You can read the paper here:
http://www.umsl.edu/~renners/C...
eclayne said:I'm curing about the anatomy of this inflorescence. The cut away is from day 2 of bloom.
Is the entire area between the pollen and the polyp-looking structures sterile? What are the polyp-looking structures. Where are the female flowers? I'm confused. 
Evan, there are very good illustrations of the various flower forms in the genera in that pdf.
I also found there is a lot of research that has been carried out on the heating mechanisms in the flowers of S. venosum. Aren't Aroids great?
