Jump to content
bgl

Dr. John Dransfield visits the Big Island

Recommended Posts

bgl

Thanks everybody for your comments and questions. I'll try to address the various issues, in no particular order.

First of all, John and his Soejatmi are leaving Hilo in a few hours, heading back to the UK so John won't be able to personally respond to any of these issues for a few more days.

Dypsis saintelucei: we walked right by two of these at Floribunda (and they look different), but John did not address this issue.

Just a general comment: John and I went through all the comments that I posted above VERY carefully. I did not want to post a comment by John unless he specifically agreed, and that we agreed on the wording. This came to down such details as to the use of the word "possibly" instead of "probably" or vice versa. When we walked around on our 8 hour garden tour we did not bring POM or any other book. It so happened that after several weeks of very dry weather, that day was a very wet day, with frequent heavy showers off and on during the day. And then we had to take cover. Well, sometimes! :) If it hadn't been for those interruptions we could probably have done the garden tour in a more efficient seven hours... John has a memory like a computer and I get the impression that he can instantly recall the flower arrangements and leaflet details etc etc of any palm. His comments ranged from "I have no idea" to "This is definitely xxxxx", and everything in between. My comments above reflect this.

Dypsis sp. Jurassic Park: John seems to think there may be two different Jurassic Parks. Jeff seems to disagree. My approach is very simple: I have no idea!

Dypsis sp. Big curly: we looked at this at Floribunda. John and I didn't specifically discuss whether I should post any comments but John did mention the name D. prestoniana as a possibility. There's a lot of uncertainty and let me stress, this is just a POSSIBILITY, and I may even overstep the boundaries here for mentioning this name.

Dypsis sp. neophloga pink crownshaft etc.: John mentioned the valid name, but because of the circumstances I'm not at liberty to reveal it, except to say that John is fairly confident that he will be able to reveal the name fairly soon. And as stated above, it is NOT pinnatifrons!

I think I remembered everything, but feel free to add comments and questions. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BS Man about Palms

Stop the plane, Bo- Bring him back, we need more....this just whet our appetite! :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MattyB

Everyone stay calm! :yay:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
osideterry

Because of my lack of familiarity with the rare Dypsis species, this thread gets added to all the others that left my head spinning.

Here's what I'm dying for: a re-cap. A photo of a palm with a name under it, followed by another photo of a palm with a name under it. Put "probably" or "possibly" next to it if necessary.

Maybe it could be a new thread Bo creates, and no one can comment on. Just hangs around there so I can use it as a reference, without each Dypsis contested and debated ad nauseum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Walter John
Here's what I'm dying for: a re-cap. A photo of a palm with a name under it, followed by another photo of a palm with a name under it. Put "probably" or "possibly" next to it if necessary.

Maybe it could be a new thread Bo creates, and no one can comment on. Just hangs around there so I can use it as a reference, without each Dypsis contested and debated ad nauseum.

Your idea Terry, a good one, away you go then, not Bo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gtlevine

This is exactly why I love Dypsis and think Madagascar is the greatest country on the planet.

Bill (Rafiki) mentioned Dypsis Bef to be northern form of Onilehensis. Most Dypsis Bef in California are what we call "Slick Willie" This palm was collected at a place called Mt tsaratezon. I have no idea how to pronounce that name let alone spell it, but that is the place Mardy Darian said he collected it and he said it came from a very high elevation, much higher than Vatovavy.

Gary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gtlevine

By the way, while we are all talking about JD's take on the Dypsis, is everybody noticing like me how unbelievable Jeff's Lemur palm is? That palm is insane, no words to describe.

Gary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
chris.oz

To be able to ID palms in this Genus, out of habitat, without flowers.........wow!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dypsisdean
This is exactly why I love Dypsis and think Madagascar is the greatest country on the planet.

Bill (Rafiki) mentioned Dypsis Bef to be northern form of Onilehensis. Most Dypsis Bef in California are what we call "Slick Willie" This palm was collected at a place called Mt tsaratezon. I have no idea how to pronounce that name let alone spell it, but that is the place Mardy Darian said he collected it and he said it came from a very high elevation, much higher than Vatovavy.

Gary

I have to chime in again on this issue. I still fail to see how two palms that 'cluster' using two distinctly different growth habits could be the same.

The 'bef' or Slick Willy I have seen divides below the ground in an identical manner as D. decipiens and a few others. I have seen many of these palms, and only once have I seen one push a small sucker out the side of a larger stem.

The D. onilahensis clusters in the traditional way, as do the others in this complex, with what we all refer to as 'suckers' emanating off the side of a larger stem. They will occasionally split down the center and 'branch' above ground, but I haven't seen these palms split/divide in the same manner that 'bef' or D. decipiens does, well underground before forming anything resembling trunk/crownshaft.

The resulting adult palms are very similar. But if you will notice, D. onilahensis (and others in the complex) have stems of varying age and size, and often times many stems. The 'bef' is always characterized as having very few stems, and those stems are of almost equal age and size because they are always generated from this underground splitting not seen in other onil/baronii complex palms. Once the trunks have started forming in 'bef' they lose the ability to divide since they can no longer split underground, and only sucker in extremely rare instances.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jdapalms

Dean,

Another difference is that Dypsis sp Bef has totally different looking seed than Dypsis onilahensis.

Jerry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BS Man about Palms

I think post #12 kinda supports that statement Dean. Since I own both, I concur. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
chris.oz
I have to chime in again on this issue. I still fail to see how two palms that 'cluster' using two distinctly different growth habits could be the same.

Dean,

I know what you mean: its a quite frustrating for a gardener. But if the taxonomists decide that they are going to name species based on a set of criteria that puts a low weight on "the clustering characteristic" then I suppose we have to live with that, and thats why horticulturalists who place more emphasis on growth habit will name "varieties " or "forms" because they are more interested in plant form than the microscopice differences betwen flowers

There are quite a lot of species with both clustering and solitary trunked forms and it would be nice to be able to tell one form the other by name. If you take a seed from one form and the palm that results has the other form, then even the horticulturists have a problem with it as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jdapalms

I just so happen to have a picture of Dypsis Bef seed.

Jerry

post-420-1216941489_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dypsisdean
I have to chime in again on this issue. I still fail to see how two palms that 'cluster' using two distinctly different growth habits could be the same.

Dean,

I know what you mean: its a quite frustrating for a gardener. But if the taxonomists decide that they are going to name species based on a set of criteria that puts a low weight on "the clustering characteristic" then I suppose we have to live with that, and thats why horticulturalists who place more emphasis on growth habit will name "varieties " or "forms" because they are more interested in plant form than the microscopice differences betwen flowers

There are quite a lot of species with both clustering and solitary trunked forms and it would be nice to be able to tell one form the other by name. If you take a seed from one form and the palm that results has the other form, then even the horticulturists have a problem with it as well.

Chris,

I understand completely what you are saying when considering leaf arrangement, amount or color of tomentum, or other morphological differences, but I consider a method of division to be a reproductive differentiation similar to seed and flower characteristics.

If/when we finally get a look at the flowers on a 'bef,' I will remain a skeptic. Having grown many of both, they "feel" to me to not only be different, but very different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dypsisdean
I just so happen to have a picture of Dypsis Bef seed.

Jerry

post-420-1216941489_thumb.jpg

Jerry,

How confident can you be of that ID being the same 'bef' that is the SW?

Did you cut into one? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
chris.oz
I have to chime in again on this issue. I still fail to see how two palms that 'cluster' using two distinctly different growth habits could be the same.

Dean,

I know what you mean: its a quite frustrating for a gardener. But if the taxonomists decide that they are going to name species based on a set of criteria that puts a low weight on "the clustering characteristic" then I suppose we have to live with that, and thats why horticulturalists who place more emphasis on growth habit will name "varieties " or "forms" because they are more interested in plant form than the microscopice differences betwen flowers

There are quite a lot of species with both clustering and solitary trunked forms and it would be nice to be able to tell one form the other by name. If you take a seed from one form and the palm that results has the other form, then even the horticulturists have a problem with it as well.

Chris,

I understand completely what you are saying when considering leaf arrangement, amount or color of tomentum, or other morphological differences, but I consider a method of division to be a reproductive differentiation similar to seed and flower characteristics.

If/when we finally get a look at the flowers on a 'bef,' I will remain a skeptic. Having grown many of both, they "feel" to me to not only be different, but very different.

Hi Dean,

In the context of Dypsis, well I have 2-3 species growing and I have seen golden cane palms on visits to Queensland so I have very limited experience in your nominal area. One thing I would like to know... maybe this info is not yet well known, does the seed from the two forms you regard as distinct breed true?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dypsisdean
Hi Dean,

In the context of Dypsis, well I have 2-3 species growing and I have seen golden cane palms on visits to Queensland so I have very limited experience in your nominal area. One thing I would like to know... maybe this info is not yet well known, does the seed from the two forms you regard as distinct breed true?

Chris,

I have no idea. And I don't know how anyone would know for sure unless they collected seed themselves from the confirmed species. It is not unheard of to receive seed that ends up having two species in the same bag. The two "species" look similar enough in gardens as adults. I can only imagine the difficulties in differentiating them in the wild. Especially if they were from two different populations and not side by side.

I am unaware of any flowering 'befs' in cultivation. Maybe someone knows of one and we could at least get the flowers to J. Dransfield.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ellidro
Hi Dean,

In the context of Dypsis, well I have 2-3 species growing and I have seen golden cane palms on visits to Queensland so I have very limited experience in your nominal area. One thing I would like to know... maybe this info is not yet well known, does the seed from the two forms you regard as distinct breed true?

Chris,

I have no idea. And I don't know how anyone would know for sure unless they collected seed themselves from the confirmed species. It is not unheard of to receive seed that ends up having two species in the same bag. The two "species" look similar enough in gardens as adults. I can only imagine the difficulties in differentiating them in the wild. Especially if they were from two different populations and not side by side.

I am unaware of any flowering 'befs' in cultivation. Maybe someone knows of one and we could at least get the flowers to J. Dransfield.

I think I remember hearing Pauleen Sullivans is flowering in Kapoho.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dypsisdean

HMMMMMMM,

If Jerry has seed, and Pauline's may be flowering......................???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ellidro
HMMMMMMM,

If Jerry has seed, and Pauline's may be flowering......................???

You took the words out of my mouth!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
chris.oz
Hi Dean,

In the context of Dypsis, well I have 2-3 species growing and I have seen golden cane palms on visits to Queensland so I have very limited experience in your nominal area. One thing I would like to know... maybe this info is not yet well known, does the seed from the two forms you regard as distinct breed true?

Chris,

I have no idea. And I don't know how anyone would know for sure unless they collected seed themselves from the confirmed species. It is not unheard of to receive seed that ends up having two species in the same bag. The two "species" look similar enough in gardens as adults. I can only imagine the difficulties in differentiating them in the wild. Especially if they were from two different populations and not side by side.

I am unaware of any flowering 'befs' in cultivation. Maybe someone knows of one and we could at least get the flowers to J. Dransfield.

Hi Dean,

I bet its another lovely evening over there in the Big Island palm paradise.

A recent paper on the Howeas of Lord Howe island showed what could potentially be done with detailed DNA studies. A cladogram was drawn up which showed the extent of genetic differences between samples of the same species collected at different parts of the island.

In a genus like Dypsis such a study of all the species and forms would probably be a mammoth and incredibly costly excercise. I wonder to what extent that is being done ? In the wild, it might be easier to compare from a larger set of individuals at various stages in the life cycle, and for sure the mistakes made by earlier botanists who failed to take environmentally induced differences into account are far less likely to be made today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rafiki

Thanks Bo, Matt, Chris, Jeff, Jerry and many others...this thread will go past 1000 posts no probs!

Some further comments:

Re Dypsis hovomantsina...I have seen this species in habitat with 1 metre of trunk and the leaflets were just starting to develop into 2 planes...giving it what JD calls an 'untidy look'. There is a large hill behind the Tampolo Lodge in Masoala where hundreds of this species are growing. So, for the time being, I still think that the illustration of this palm in Jeff's garden is too young to name with certainty.

As mentioned before and a further thread from Bo stating that JD thinks that Dypsis sp. Jurassic Park consists of two diff species. Certainly this is the case in NQ and one of them is D. tokoravina.

Dypsis sp. 'bef' comes from Mandritsara and I think the district is called Beforona. High altitude. The northern plateau forms are larger in all respects and as JD states in POM 'there is a gradual cline from north to south in leaflet length (decreasing) and number (increasing.)' Seed size varies from 9-17 X 6.5-12mm...this accounts perhaps for Jerry's larger seed in 'Bef'. A good example of this species variation is comparing the larger forms with D. onilahensis from Isalo in the SW of Mad! The palms I have representing this type came in as D. ambositrae 'wild collected'!

I agree that the palm D. sp. 'ceracea' is not D. nauseosa and have looked more closely at the photos published. That dread feeling has come back that it is possible that my D. sp. ceracea is not the same as Jeff's and others. My tree has drooping leaflets not unlike D. nauseosa but otherwise dis-similar to that species. AND re D. tsaravoasira as D. sp. ceracea I can only state again that the seed I got as ceracea was 14x12mm...very diff to tsaravoasira. Other palms in this district as ceracea are also like mine so what is going on!!?

We shall learn in due course of time! Anyone got a good photo of their large D sp. ceracea? My camera is out of action pro temps.

Cheers! Bill.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bgl

Bill,

Thanks a lot for all your comments! :) Correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that the real Dypsis ceracea is not in cultivation?

Bo-Göran

Edit - after reading your last post again, I see that you refer to it as Dypsis sp. ceracea, so presumably you're referring to a palm that you believe not to be ceracea? And here in Hawaii that's the one that I posted two photos of above (and the one that JD identified as D. tsaravoasira). Have you seen individuals that look different?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gtlevine

Bill, do you have a photo of the two forms of Jurrasic park? I would like to compare the Jurrasic park with Tokoravina and see if I can determine a difference between the two. Also, have you seen the large Dypsis Nauseosa on the way down to Ifanadianae? I always wondered why what we are getting sold as Dypsis Nauseosa here in So Cal looks so different than these down in Ifanadianae. I don't know if they are Tsaravoasira, but definately they don't fit the description of Nauseosa.

Gary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
calyptrocalyx&licuala freck

Hi Guys,

Wow I think we should slow down a little, There's a fair bit of a

mix up in this Thread that John Dransfield will for sure set us

straight once he returns to the U.K.

Bo, nice picture's you took there for all to enjoy,

Regards Mikey........ :blink:

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rafiki

Bo...as far as I know Dypsis ceracea is not in cultivation. It became clear quite early on that the introduction under that name could not be the slender true D. ceracea so most people just added D. sp. suggesting that we do not know what it is yet but it aint true ceracea!

It is possible that my D. sp. ceracea are not the same as those illustrated at Jeffs and identified by JD as D. tsaravoasira. Will post photos of mine when I can unjam my camera.

Gary.....I have the seen the group of D. nauseosa on the way to Ifinadiana and seen the seeds. We think they are the true sp. as they match the real thing in Manombo. However I think you are suggesting that the seeds that came in to the USA as this sp. are from these plants and are not nauseosa? Let me know.

Mike! Please point out the mixups you claim in the posted photos! Debate leads to knowledge and JD likes this and even argument! What do you think and good luck in your new job!

Bill.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LJG

One question I have for many that compare plants in habitat as *known* species and using those as a benchmark. So many similar species are found in the same areas. Also, with Madagascar being such a surprise around every corner, who is the one identifying these things that people are using as benchmarks there? Gary talks about D. nauseosa being different then what is here. In looking in POM, the picture and the description looks like what I would have if it were older and fully exposed to the elements. So how can we be confident what is labeled in Madagascar is even correct? I mean if you are hiking around and someone says that is D. nauseosa, well who was that person? I mean seed collectors don't even get it right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ellidro
Bo...as far as I know Dypsis ceracea is not in cultivation. It became clear quite early on that the introduction under that name could not be the slender true D. ceracea so most people just added D. sp. suggesting that we do not know what it is yet but it aint true ceracea!

It is possible that my D. sp. ceracea are not the same as those illustrated at Jeffs and identified by JD as D. tsaravoasira. Will post photos of mine when I can unjam my camera.

Gary.....I have the seen the group of D. nauseosa on the way to Ifinadiana and seen the seeds. We think they are the true sp. as they match the real thing in Manombo. However I think you are suggesting that the seeds that came in to the USA as this sp. are from these plants and are not nauseosa? Let me know.

Mike! Please point out the mixups you claim in the posted photos! Debate leads to knowledge and JD likes this and even argument! What do you think and good luck in your new job!

Bill.

Bill

I just bought some seed from ortanique as Dypsis Manamboto. Might this look like the seed or spikes of the palm (nauseosa) you are talking about? I know it's a longshot and you can never really tell unless you cut a seed, but I thought I would ask.

P1020607.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bgl

Len,

I'm intrigued by your statement that what you have would look like D. nauseosa, if older and exposed etc. I.e. compared to the photo & description in POM. I'm looking at the photos in POM right now. A somewhat distant photo of a D. tsaravoasira on page 154 is definitely a very good candidate for the palms in my photos in posts #13 and 14 (which JD DID identify as D. tsaravoasira). On the other hand, the D. nauseosa on p.158 is most definitely NOT a good candidate. In other words, the palms we've referred to as D. nauseosa for the last 7 years look VERY different from the D. nauseosa on p.158. I have grown these palms from tiny seedlings to specimens 30 ft tall, and I can say with certainty that at no time did they look like they were going to turn into what we see on p.158. So, my question: what does your nauseosa look like? Below is a very typical seedling. They always open up with a pinkish new frond.

Incidentally, a bit of background on this palm. I bought my first ones (in 1996) as Dypsis ceracea. When I attended the IPS Board meeting in San Diego in August 2001 someone brought up the question of the correct name for this palm, and made the statement that what's been sold as D. ceracea for the previous 5-6 years is in fact D. nauseosa. I returned home, checked POM and compared the description for ceracea and nauseosa and looked at the ones I had in the garden, by measuring the trunk etc. It was then clear to me that they were definitely NOT D. ceracea, so I went with the D. nauseosa name. I did not pay too much attention to the photo on p.158, realizing that some palms look dramatically different when they get up in size. I don't know who brought up the name nauseosa in Aug 2001, nor do I know why this person assumed this to be the case. So, from my point of view, I'm using 2001 as the year when the name nauseosa came into use (incorrectly, for this palm). I'm now wondering whether ANY real D. ceracea OR D. nauseosa have EVER been introduced into cultivation.

Bo-Göran

post-22-1216965508_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LJG

My point was more about who names the palms in country and confirms them then about what D. nauseosa really is. My D. nauseosa is just like every one else's they have. But when I read the details like no petiole, keeled, and leaflets on one plane, spreading and almost pendulous. This can be found in my plant. Then I just look at the picture and understand this is in the wild and is an old plant. So I could easily see the plant named D. nauseosa that we all have as being this plant. It would not surprise me. Also, when I see pictures of Pauline's in HI called Dypsis ceracea, I really see the possibility of it being that plant on page 158 too. But that is just me talking as I have not been to Madagascar nor have I seen yours in person.

Another thing, Mardy has a plant called D. nauseosa that he has in garden that have been around before 2001 from what I remember him saying. They are small because they grow slow here and are in full shade. Maybe Gary knows how long Mardy has had his - maybe his too are from 2001 and I mis-heard. He also has a plant that looks almost identical to D. nauseosa but has a few small difference in petiole coloration and a more stiff leaf, that he got as D. ceracea. Not saying what is what and if those are correct names either, just pointing out something. I do not think he collected the seed himself. Hopefully Gary or Ron knows more or can find out so they can confirm or correct what I said here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rafiki

A comment on D. nauseosa. It is true that few Malagasy have any idea what palm seed they are collecting for seed distributors. The seed distributors in Madagascar...in the absence of good photos and location details then guess what the palm is and label as...whatever. Even with good photos ...the name is still often, but not always, a guess. Then, even in Australia(!), there have been instances of the recipient of this seed...renaming them as something else.

What Peter Balasky and I (and others in our group) do prior to entering any pre-planned forest entry is have a list of all the palm species found prev in that forest. We then target specific palms large or small. In Manombo one of our target palms was D. nauseosa and we found this straight away. The seed, infructescence and general palm morphology are all checked and, 18 months ago, all keyed out to D. nauseosa. If there is doubt then the photos and general description are sent to John Dransfield for confirmation or otherwise. D. nauseosa is distinctive in its drooping leaflets and ruminate yellowish seed. It is a very large palm and quite rare. The seedlings do not look like those illustrated above though! Give me another day to fix my camera and I will show you the seedlings from our 2007 trip.

If my memory is correct, I asked John D. two years ago what the present status of D. ceracea was and he replied that it was unchanged. Perhaps this has changed since?

More please!

Bill.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ntheastpalms

Here are a couple of photos of Dypsis nauseosa seedlings that Bill sent me

DSCF3958JPG.jpg

DSCF3956JPG.jpg

DSCF3957JPG.jpg

As your camera is out of action I hope you dont mind Bill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
calyptrocalyx&licuala freck

Hi Guys,

Hi Bill, these days I prefer to discuss not argue as the palm world is mixed up enough here's a couple of thoughts, but I think Bo made an honest mistake with this one,

in Post 8, the names, or picture's should be the other way around, with Dypsis bejofo,( fine plumose leaf) , (the Ghost palm) in P.O.M this palm come in large numbers of seed into Aussie

but was a very hard 'sp' for many to grow, and was also put under a lot of pressure in the wild due to the locals cutting down this 'sp' for the palm Heart.

And then theres (D bejofa the broad leaf form) the second one which was so much easier to grow than the latter, and D bejofa also has 2 known locations and has yet to be formly named,

just a couple of observations that will do for now, I don't want to confuse the issue any more than it already is, So time to leave it up to J.D and then we can have an open discussion from what arises out of this thread.

Hey Bill I'd love to see the second form of D 'Jurassic Park', :hmm: aka- D tokoravina is there

any within the Cairns area or district that I could see or even better have you got pictures

for us to view, Hey thanks also for the well wishes Bill.

Regards Mikey

Edited by calyptrocalyx&licuala freck
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rafiki

Thanks Matt! Saved me a lot of hassle tomorrow! Yes...these are true D. nauseosa!

Thanks Mike....good to read your views! Dypsis bejofo (giant white palm and #1 Dypsis in POM) is ok in habitat so far...I saw them in '93 and Jeff Searle and Peter Balasky in 2006. Jeff Searle ...can you confirm this? On a ridge enroute to the Lemurophoenix and Marojejya darianii locality. Was talking to Mark Daish the other day and he lost his D. bejofo...a maginificent specimen...in the cyclone. Perhaps Arden Dearden has a few.

Mike...Jan Smith has a superb example of D. tokoravina that came in as D. sp. Jurassic Park.

Cheers! Bill.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
calyptrocalyx&licuala freck

Hi Bill

Hey is Jans specimen the second 'sp' you where talking about.

Cheers Mikey

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
chris.oz

Bo Goran,

Just noting the backdrop to the post #27 is just a stunning example of how a palm garden can look.

You deserve congratulations again for putting together the species in that way. You garden rocks !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
calyptrocalyx&licuala freck

Hi Bill

Jan's D. tokoravina came from Maria some 17 years ago now, but this

'sp' didn't come into Aussie as D. 'sp' 'Jurassic park' this was a name

they used in the States and not here till lately.

Where abouts is the second 'sp' that is different you where talking about.

Cheers Mikey

Edited by calyptrocalyx&licuala freck
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rafiki

Mike! People are not interested in wild information and I can demonstrate your facts as just that. Prior to 1995 very few people knew the real names of the palms of Madagascar until POM was published. No, Maria never had D. tokoravina 17 years ago (1991) ..if that was the case mature or almost mature specimens would be growing up here...and I have most of Maria's price lists as momentos. D. tokoravina never appeared on any price list till ca ten years ago. Last time I was at Jan Smith's we discussed Dypsis sp. Jurassic Park and the two species that derived therefrom. One of hers turned out to be D. tokoravina....and I bought a few smaller 'Jurassic Park' off her hoping they would turn out like hers but they did not!! My bad luck perhaps! Or not! By the way it was Jeff who named the palm introduction as 'Jurassic Park' after one of his visitors looked at his developing specimens and said....'Gee! just like Jurassic Park'!!

Mike, I have no idea why you have chosen this tack! It has contributed nothing to our debate. If you disagree with the findings of John Dransfield and others in Hawaii it is up to you and Clayton to illustrate on what grounds you know better. Then we can all benefit from your facts. That is the principal purpose of this site.

Bill.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Phil

Group,

Very interesting discussion. Bo, thanks for all the photographs and starting it. This is a fascinatig discussion of people trying to develope a common understanding and agreement regarding a vast array of species newly introduced to all of us. We're led by John and his book P.O.M. But, as I read this, it is very apparent that this is still a process of learning and agreeing. It would be near impossible for JD to be 100% accurate on all plants he's seen in domestic gardens. I've been growing Dypsis for over 30 years and the predominant theme I think applies to "different" species is that we don't yet have a species name on a lot of them. Note that this group led by our "experts" and JD have intricate discussions about a particular plant. Sometimes there is no common agreement. Next, imagine a seedsman in Madagascar that may know less than you. He collects seeds and ships them off. What do we have as we grow his seeds? Who knows? (we accept the concept of "we'll figure it out later). I and other growers have grown hundreds of "species" of Dypsis and other Madagascar species; many with the name "species" or some factitious name attached. This has led us to the point we are at today. I like to sit back and observe the discussion. It's fascinating and at the end there will be more agreement and knowledge. Good work everyone.

Phil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gtlevine

Bill, Bo has clarified my observations regarding Dypsis Nauseosa. The California and Hawaii plants did not resemble Dypsis Nauseosa I observed in Madagascar. I don't know where the seed came from, to clarify your question. We all assumed they were true Nauseosa and that is why Len brought up his point because only those who have been to Madagascar know what a mature plant looks like. But with Bo and those in Hawaii now having maturing specimens, it became obvious to me that these palms in So Cal and Hawaii were not the true Nauseosa. Both you and your fellow Aussies have now clairified this mystery and my points about this palm. Now the next step is for us to figure out exactly what the palm we have actually is??????

Gary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...