Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 09:22:46 From: SCHLAUER@chemie.uni-wuerzburg.de To: email@example.com Message-Id: <aabcdefg834$foo@default> Subject: Re: N. curtisii
Dear Richard et al.,
> N. curtisii is probably a maxima, but no one knows for sure.
I do know for sure. It is definitely a synonym of _N. maxima_
(Masters' drawing accompanying the original description is remarkably
unequivocal). Only the provenience of the (original, not necessarily
the ABG) plant is somewhat dubious. Masters wrote that the plant was
from Borneo. But such plants have never been observed in Borneo
before or after. It is generally assumed thet the locality is an
error on the label.
> There is some conjecture that it is a natural hybrid between N.
> albomarginata and N. maxima
Not for _N. curtisii_ sensu Mast. BTW: The ranges of the two species
do not overlap, so it is most unlikely that such a natural hybrid
could exist. The hybrid was produced in cultivation, however.
> I don't know if N. "curtisii" is a valid cultivar name,
No. It is a valid (but not accepted because it is a later taxonomic
synonym of _N. maxima_) taxonomic name. BTW: The official terminology
(ICNCP) does not call cultivar names that can and should be used
"valid" (which is a term used for taxonomic names) but rather
"established" (and accepted/acceptable).
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Jan 02 2001 - 17:31:55 PST