Graham Rice
Fri, 06 Apr 2007 08:27:46 PDT
In his 1993 monograph, Peter Boyce treats A. concinnatum as a 
separate species, as does the RHS 

Also, Peter Boyce has recently revised his opinion on A. italicum, 
concluding that subsp. italicum and subsp. neglectum cannot be 
separated. I'm sending Mary Sue a pdf of his article in The Plantsman 
magazine (March 2006) in which he explains this. Unfortunatately, I 
cannot make it available to all as this is copyright material and I 
only have permission for limited private circulation.

'Marmoratum' is now treated as a cultivar.

Graham Rice
Milford, PA (22F, snowing steadily)

>I'm still trying to finish the thumbnails and consolidate them on pages and
>was working on Arum which I know very little about. Kew has listed Arum
>concinnatum as the accepted name for Arum italicum var. maroratum and Arum
>italicum subvar. marmoratum. Giorgio has added a picture of  plants he
>calls Arum italicum ssp. marmoratum to our wiki.  Since he lives in Italy
>where it grows perhaps the name is uses is accepted in Italy if not by Kew.
>Do any of you Aroid fans have advice about how we should label it on the
>wiki. Thanks.
>Mary Sue
>  From Kew:
>Accepted Name:  Arum concinnatum Schott, Icon. Aroid.: t. 39 (1857).
>Family:         Araceae
>Homotypic Synonyms:
>Arum italicum var. marmoratum (Schott) Nyman, Consp. Fl. Eur.: 755 (1882).
>Arum italicum subvar. marmoratum (Schott) Engl., Pflanzenr., IV, 23F: 85
>pbs mailing list

More information about the pbs mailing list