Chionodoxa help

totototo@telus.net totototo@telus.net
Tue, 08 Apr 2008 11:36:19 PDT
I doubt chionodoxic confusion will be sorted out any time soon for a 
couple of reasons. First, botanical research on this group is 
probably not a very high priority, and (at a guess) it's long overdue 
for a careful reinvestigation not only of specimens in herbaria, but 
also of what's actually growing out there in the wild.

Second, it appears that chionodoxa is a promiscuous genus that will 
hybridize at the drop of a hat, even going out-caste by crossing w. 
scillas. Since we are *gardeners* dealing with *garden* plants, it's 
probably a safe bet that a lot of our plants are hybrids of 
indeterminate parentage.

For the record, I've gone through my library and noted briefly what 
various publications say about Chionodoxa, as follows:


1949, Manual of Cultivated Plants, Bailey, rev. ed.

C. luciliae Boissier includes cvv Tmolusii & Gigantea
C. sardensis

1971, Collins Guide to Bulbs, 2nd ed.

C. cretica
C. gigantea
C. lochiae
C. luciliae
C. nana
C. sardensis
C. siehei
C. tmoli8

1973, "Bulbs", by Roy Genders

C. cretica
C. gigantea
C. luciliae
C. nana
C. sardensis
one other species not named

1973, Dwarf Bulbs, Mathew

C. cretica
C. nana included under C. cretica, whtever that means
C. gigantea
C. lochiae
C. luciliae 
C. sardensis
C. siehei
C. tmoli included in C. luciliae

1976, Hortus Third

C. gigantea = cultivar of C. luciliae
C. luciliae Boissier
C. sardensis
C. tmoli = cultivar of C. luciliae
no distinction betw. C. lucilise hort. and C. luciliae Boissier

1981, Bulbs, Bulbous Plant of Europe and their Allies, Grey-Wilson, & 
Mathew

C. cretica
C. nana
C. albescens
(remaining species are Turkish in origin)

1981, The Bulb Book, Rix & Phillips

C. cretica
C. lochiae
C. albescens
	This is the original publication of the combination
	C. albescens, btw. The plant was formerly considered a Scilla.
C. luciliae Boissier
C. gigantea = C. luciliae Boissier
C. siehei
C. sardensis
C. nana auct. = C. albescens

1986, The European Garden Flora, vol. I

C. albescens
C. cretica = C. nana
C. sardensis
C. forbesii
C. luciliae hort = C. forbesii
C. tmolusii = C. forbesii
C. siehei = C. forbesii
C. luciliae Boissier
C. lochiae
C. nana
C. albescens

1987, The Smaller Bulbs, Mathew

C. albescens
C. gigantea = C. luciliae Boissier
C. lochiae
C. luciliae Boissier
C. luciliae hort. = C. siehei or C. forbesii
C. nana
C. cretica = C. nana
C. sardensis
C. siehei
C. tmolusii = C. siehei
C. forbesii

1998, Plant Finder, 1998-1999 Edition

C. cretica = C. nana
C. forbesii - includes Siehei group
C. gigantea = C. luciliae Gigantea group
C. luciliae Boissier - valid species, includes Gigantea group
C. luciliae hort. = C. forbesii
C. mariesii - invalid name
C. nana - good species
C. sardensis - good species
C. siehei = C. forbesii Siehei group
C. tmolusi = C. forbesii 'Tmoli'



I'm not altogether sure if this summary is very useful, but hopefully 
it will give us all some idea of the way in which chionodoxa 
classification has evolved over the last 60 years.

To me, it looks like the nomenclature is stabilizing in terms of 
species boundaries, but Mary Sue's comments about some Chionodoxa 
being moved to Scilla suggests tha the situation is still very much 
in a state of flux.


What, btw, has happened to C. albescens? A plant under is now sold in 
garden centers in the fall which closely resembles the picture in The 
Bulb Book, but the name is curiously missing from the 1998-1999 Plant 
Finder. I've had a clump of it for many years, unidentified though 
the Bulb Book was bedside reading. I believe this clump is traceable 
to the nursery run by Ed Lohbrunner until 1984 or thereabouts, so 
this stock probably goes back a long way.


-- 
Rodger Whitlock
Victoria, British Columbia, Canada
Maritime Zone 8, a cool Mediterranean climate

on beautiful Vancouver Island


More information about the pbs mailing list