maybe not anything special,but i love it and wanted to share a picture.
my species last evening
it is a lovely delicute color
Its beautiful.
I love it. Wish mine would bloom like that.
thanks for all the nice reply's.
It is precious, and I love doubles!!! Is it pale lavender or is that your digital??
Very pretty!
Sherry, it is a pure white with wonderful fragrance.
We are glad you shared your picture with us. It is very pretty. Mine will not drop its second skirt unless it is in the spring and fall when the weather is cooler.
very pretty. I'm giving mine one more yr to bloom and if it does not off to the trash dump.
Very pretty. Wish mine would bloom.
Wow! That skirt really dropped for you! It looks great!
I love this one. I do not know why mine never look this good!
OK, has someone played a joke on LilCajunLady36 or is there acutally a Brug named "Species". I couldn't find evidence of one except at "nativehabitat" but they are now using the same picture on a listing that says Brugmansia - Angel Trumpet, 4th page of their Brug listing if you do a search. Brugmansias aren't listed in their plant section on their new website, either. Anyone know the story????
Lovely
Judy there is a Brug called Species.
http://davesgarden.com/pf/finder/index.php?sname=Brugmansias&choice=S
I don't know for sure if it originated at Logees but they do sell it.
Terry was about to remove the above Plant File because she also thought it was in error. I sent her a link to this Thread and also a link to the vendor who has it for sale. Strange that an international organization would allow a plant to be named "species".
Judy
I don't think the name would be allowed if it was going to be registered but this Brug has been around for awhile and many people have it so it is a well known name.
Edited to say I don't know for sure who actually named the plant and I'm not positive where it originated.
This message was edited Apr 21, 2005 10:34 PM
Which brings to mind...Terry sent me an email about my picture of it in PlantFiles, anyone got any idea where or what it should be listed?
Many folks have it and even tho wrongly named, it would be nice to type in "Species" and find it!
I think the only one that can actually change the name is the hybridizer that grew and named it.
So many own it under "Species" and it is being sold and traded as Species so I don't think the name will change anytime soon.
JMHO but I think it should stay in the PlantFiles under that name.
When Logees (or any other vendor or reference, for that matter) refers to a plant being the species, they are attempting to differentiate it from any cultivars or varieties hybridized from that species. An example of a species is Brugmansia candida. No plant - as far as I know - is permitted to use "species" as the specific epithet or cultivar/variety name. Not to cast stones, but it's sloppy record keeping when a vendor resorts to calling a plant Brugmansia species - it probably means they've lost track (or never knew for sure) what they're growing.
From a glance at Logees' site, you will notice they do not put the name 'Species' in single quotes: http://www.logees.com/searchprods.asp as they do cultivars such as 'Ecuador Pink' and 'Charles Grimaldi' (I'd still have to take 'em to task for applying 'Pink' or 'Var' as valid cultivar names, and for applying species as the epithet here.)
So now the question is - is this Brugmansia candida? Or Brugmansia aurea, or some other species?
I always thought it was really candida flora plena ('-'?)
EDITED CAUSE I cant spell
This message was edited May 6, 2005 9:30 AM
hmmm it's gone on your Logees link. lol
Is that the power of DG or the power of Terry??? lol lol lol
It's still on the site: http://www.logees.com/products.asp?dept=30 Scroll down the page.
Goodness and I thought Terry took care of "that"!!! lol lol
Regardless if it's a "wrong" name, many of us growers have it and trade it. If we change the name here--how will anyone find it? Isn't this a web site 'for gardeners, by gardeners'? I would suggest leaving the name as is with an (*) footnote denoting an invalid name.
JMHO
Here's what we can do. We can list it as Brugmansia x candida with two synonyms:
1. Brugmansia species along with an indication the name is incorrect, but often sold that way, and
2. Brugmansia x candida 'Flora Plena' if there is general consensus it's the same as the plant that's sold and traded under that name.
If we don't make these changes, I'm afraid we'll eventually find ourselves with separate entries for each of these names.
We are for and by gardeners. By adhering to international taxonomy standards, we ensure that gardeners around the world can rely on what they read here when identifying plants they are buying, growing or trading. If we knowingly promulgate misinformation (even if vendors are doing it), we aren't doing anyone any favors, and we lessen our credibility with our users.
The plant in question is definitely not the same as Candida Double White. Flora Plena just means that it is a flower with double skirts and in other countries, those words are tacked on behind the names of doubles, in many cases. I believe it is a description, not part of the name. I personally think that since there are probably hundreds and hundreds of people out there already calling this plant 'Species', by changing that, there will be even more confusion. This brug looks more like Hawaiian Double White or Enchanted Double White than any other I've seen. I really don't think anyone should be changing the name of it. I'd rather have one called Species than to have one with many names. JMO.
This message was edited May 6, 2005 9:30 AM
I *do* hear what y'all are saying, and I understand this plant has a history of being called by this name. To clear up a few misconceptions.....
'Flora Plena' or var. flora plena (it is used as either a cultivar or varietal name) universally means the plant has a double flower. That's not a European thing, nor can it be casually tagged on to any plant with double flowers. There are groups (IPNI, GRIN, and others) that decide when a variety or cultivar may be so called by this name.
As there is a school of thought that Brugmansia x candida aka Brugmansia species is also known as Brugmansia candida 'Flora Plena' then 'Flora Plena' should be added as a synonym unless/until the dissenters have proven their case (DNA evidence is typically the standard applied nowadays.)
You can still call this plant Brugmansia Species in your own personal records. And you'll be able to find it if you search PlantFiles for it by that name (as a synonym.) But I'm afraid Brugmansia 'Species' or even Brugmansia species it is not a valid name, and we can't continue to list it under that "main name" (basionym). Please understand that I don't make up the taxonomy rules, nor can I arbitrarily decide when certain entries don't have to follow these rules.
Interesting thread. I agree with Brugie, whose name is Shirley - there are hundreds of DG members that know her as Brugie - if I use Shirley only, there will be confusion, since there are several members on this forum named Shirley...so, for easier reference I refer to her as:
Brugie; 1)ShirleyCharitonIA 2)Shirley Morr
Maybe not a perfect example, but you get my drift...
I agreed with Brugie . .
IMO
b. candida flora plena as descriptive but not a proper name , is presented in lower case.
This message was edited May 6, 2005 9:36 AM