Any idea what this one is? I'm guessing it's a colocasia, but it's giving me a hard time on the ID.
Another calocasia ID needed
Another shot.
Does it send out runners? It looks just like mine, which was given in a trade last year labeled only as "green running elephant ear"(sorry). Definately a colocasia-I'll be curious to see if someone can ID it for you.
Well I got it from my mom, and she said it spreads like wildfire, so I'm assuming that yes, it is a runner (it spreads).
Just bumping this back up.... it's been a while and this thing has about taken over parts of my yard. I love it, but it's quite invasive. Any ideas on the ID?
Leaves point down. Back lobes fused above the stem. THese point to colocasia.
It looks a lot like our native Colocasia esculenta.
It may well be a form of Colocasia esculenta, one of the most variable of all aroids.
This explains why they are so difficult to tack down: http://www.exoticrainforest.com/Colocasia%20esculenta%20large%20pc.html
Steve
Colocasia esculenta var. esculenta isn't difficult. You just need to ask Kea!
She loves Hawaiian Taro!
Ku likes Taro too!
Hey Rachel! You're on it!
That is edible Hibiscus, Abelmoschus manihot.
The plant provides a valuable protein source in 3rd World economies. It produces hedges of good eating leaves!
Keonikale's Taro looks like what we call "bun-long" (Pake or Chinese Taro). The oxalate cooks out quickly. It is good food!
"Bunn Long" isn't a runner. It's one of the most common grown here as food.
In Hawai'i, Bun-Long is a runner. It has a dark-purple spot in the center (piko) of the leaf. It is Colocasia esculenta var. antiquorum.
The choice Hawaiian Taro ("Kalo") used for Poi is the local Colocasia esculenta var. esculenta.
All Taro is good eating.
Hawaiian Taro is da best kind!
You can see that Keonikale's plant is a runner (Colocasia esculenta var. antiquorum) as the new shoot is coming up several inches (centimeters!) from the parent corm.
It looks exactly like Bun-Long (pronounced : boon-long).
Hawaiian Taro (Colocasia esculenta var. esculenta) produces shoots (oha) directly off of the parent (makua) corm.
If your Bun-Long isn't a runner, you don't have Bun-Long!
I have Bunn Long, I think you've got it mixed up.
While Bun-Long may not throw runners that travel far from the parent plant, it still does throw runners. This is a trait of Colocasia esculenta var. antiquorum.
Colocasia esculenta var. esculenta never makes runners.
Here is a young Bun-Long plant throwing a shoot. Hawaiian Taro does not do that.
Colocasia esculenta var. antiquorum it is then. Thanks for the help IDing this one. I got it from someone who called it Taro, but I wasn't sure. Now I know. Mahalo for the ID.
I take it this is the Plant file for this plant? http://davesgarden.com/guides/pf/go/189868/
I would say the longest runner I've seen on this plant is about 3' long. But it's definitely made its way through the yard, including into some areas I'm still not sure how it got into.
This message was edited May 4, 2010 1:31 PM
Re-reading this thread I noticed there was some debate about what specifically I meant by "running." Thought I'd clarify.
This EE spread both above and beneath the ground. It sends out very visible runners later in the season and they appear almost like bamboo rhizomes would traveling across the ground. At the tip is the newest colocasia, and eventually the "connecting cord" is severed.
They also appear to spread underground quite a bit, I'm guessing by the same type of runners that appear above ground - though beneath the ground they seem to spread even faster. They grow with a vengeance and have already taken over one part of my yard this year - including in my flower bed which has a retaining wall going over a foot into the ground (so it had to go under it) or it sent a surface runner in over the top late last year. Here's some new photos.
Another. They have also spread to other areas of the yard. I think I may have dropped some pieces of it, otherwise I have no idea how it has popped up where it has in the front yard.
Your's isn't Bunn Long, despite what some people say.
I respectfully must disagree with the last post.
To make a declaration a plant is or is not a particular species or cultivar on any forum without having actually examined the plant is not advisable. Several of my botany advisers have carefully taught me it is absolutely impossible to say any plant is positively a species without having the plant in hand along with the ability to see the venation, the stem and especially a spathe and spadix. I spend time with Dr. Croat at least three times each year and every time I visit I learn just how little I actually know. Dave himself (Metrosideros) is a botanist and deserves credit and respect for his training.
To offer a "without a doubt" is or is not ID without being able to examine the specimen is not a wise recommendation. Regardless of how much knowledge you gain by growing there are subtle factors a photo cannot show. The experts i named virtually always indicate a plant "appears" to be or is "likely to be" such and such. If the best trained people in the field won't offer such "positive" or "negative" confirmation why should anyone without their training presume they are qualified to do so?
I will never feel comfortable indicating anything more than a plant "appears" to be or is "likely to be". I prefer to make observations and offer recommendations so a grower can determine what they are growing accurately rather that "absolute positive without a doubt" declarations. I have never felt such "declarations" are appropriate in a plant forum setting.
I do not consider myself an expert despite over 20 years experience in growing aroids while owning one of the largest collections in the middle United States. I am just a careful observer that takes the time to read the scientific literature and seek good advice from scientifically qualified experts. Plants are variable and there are often features involved that make such "declarations" inappropriate.
The article noted below written with the help of several people including qualified botanists that understand variation far better than do I both explains and illustrates why such declarations are ill advised. Compare the features, understand why variation plays a role and draw your own conclusions but everyone please don't make such declarations unless you are scientifically trained and have the plant in front of you. I have even seen a few times when a qualified botanist tried to make such a "declaration" and was eventually forced to eat his words.
The goal of such a forum as this should be to share information that can lead to a better understanding of the subject, little else.
http://www.exoticrainforest.com/Natural%20variation%20within%20aroid%20and%20%20plant%20species.html
Steve
This message was edited May 7, 2010 9:08 AM
This message was edited May 10, 2010 2:47 PM
So it's definitely Colocasia esculenta, we just aren't sure of the cultivar I'm guessing? Any ideas on what it's closest relative would be? I know it's very hardy - it's also very hard to kill. Even moving it under a few times where it pops up in the grass doesn't seem to phase it.
The runners are very unique on the ground, I've never seen any other EE spread quite like this one does.
There are so many variations of Colocasia esculenta it would take a world class expert to be certain and even then there would be differences of opinion.
My close friend Leland Miyano in Hawaii who is a world class grower but not a botanist can name a ton of variations of C esculenta at sight while at best I might be able to name four or five. Brian Williams who is highly respected on this forum can name far more than I but it would be my guess he would agree with my earlier post.
The same exact variations are capable of taking on different "facial" appearances as well as changes in their form. That is precisely what they have done in places like Hawaii where there are now close to 150 known forms. Dave can likely give you a better number.
A known cultivar may also perform in one way in a particular environment but differently elsewhere. Local variations can never indicate they are the one and only form, aroids change. I see different things happening to the same exact plant in my own collection all the time.
I have a brand new and unnamed Philodendron species from Ecuador I have been working with Dr. Croat to have named (Croat 101488) and the single plant has demonstrated a good deal of variation on one plant in the 20 months. In the beginning it produced prophylls ( a form of cataphyll) set away from the new leaf but now it produces a standard cataphyll that has two ribs. In the beginning some of the top aroid botanists were offering all sorts of explanations but we now don't know what was actually happening. I simply documented something strange that will require years for a qualified scientist to study and figure out.
I have been photographing the plant for Dr. Croat on a very regular basis and one leaf will produce "X" number of lateral leaf veins but five leaves later it is different. Still, it is the same plant! It now appears to be producing a couple of inflorescences so Dr. Croat may finally be able to describe it but there is a great deal of study that must be done. Eventually, I will likely donate the plant to the Missouri Botanical Garden for study.
The best I can offer is to enjoy your plant as it is. Aroids morph and that is an undeniable fact. I send tons of photos all the time to the experts I named along with four other botanists I didn't name. I get differing answers all the time and the reason is almost always "variation". To a grower variation is very confusing but it happens so we all have to learn to accept it.
Add to that, we have no way of knowing if there is a hybridized form involved here and that alone can throw off different plants. Unless you are well trained some questions may never be answered.
Steve
I sent a note to my friend Leland Miyano in Hawaii asking how many varieties of Colocasia esculenta he is aware of in the islands. For those of you that don't know his name punch it up on Google, Leland is a qualified expert, just not a botanist. He is on the board of several large Hawaiian botanical gardens and is one of the most respected tropical plant growers in Hawaii. He personally designed the gardens of several of the major botanical displays as well as major properties and was also featured in Martha Stewart Living Magazine last year.
I believe some of you will be shocked at his answer which only demonstrates why no grower should insist they are positively correct about any form of this species.
Leland responded, "There are about 300 Hawaiian varietal names recorded. Of these, perhaps 150-175 types were recognized as distinct by the ancient Hawaiians, in 25 groups. Today, only 8 groups are known to survive. Perhaps 70 or so native forms persist, but, no one has large collections of these. Amy Greenwell Garden has a good collection, but, the high maintenance of these plants require that only a fraction can be grown out. There are other types that are not considered to be of Hawaiian origin as well. I am planting dryland varieties in the Bishop Museum Garden...but, only as a small demonstration."
His count does not include China, Southeast Asia where the plant is known to have originated and is still a staple part of the diet of those regions. Colocasia esculenta is also commonly grown in the Caribbean, Central America, Mexico, and much of South America as a source of food. For those of you that have visited Hawaii, Colocasia esculenta is served as "Poi".
Some of the botanists I correspond with will quickly tell you they know little about this species. There is just too much to know. The only two I would consider experts in the species are Alistair Hay in Australia who was at one time the director of a major garden in Sydney and Peter Boyce in Malaysia.
Growers know far less about this species than many would like to admit. And by the way, when someone tries to tell you all aroids are "poisonous" remember this species! The internet is filled with junk information.
Steve
I assume then if I want to give it away or even sell it locally, I should refer to it just as Colocasia Esculenta or Taro? I'm not looking for a dead set ID, just something that would give me the characteristics of the plant in Plantfiles so that when I do give it away I can tell people what I'm giving them, or at least an idea of what I'm giving them. But then I guess I already know plenty of the characteristics since I've had it so many years, just not sure how hardy it is... it thrives here, but i wonder if it'd grow as well in NC?
Very interesting reading on this thread!
According to Staples, George W. & Herbst, Derral R. 2005. "A Tropical Garden Flora": Keonikale's Taro can be referred to as Colocasia esculenta var. antiquorum, as it produces runners and lots of juveniles. (I have not seen taro spread so much as Keonikale's, but this could be a response to the habitat it is in as Steve mentioned.)
As a follow up on what Steve was saying about Hawai'i: E.S. Craighill Handy in "The Hawaiian Planter" (1940) describes 346 varieties of Hawaiian Taro (Colocasia esculenta var. esculenta).
The Ke'anae Arboretum on Maui, in 1970, contained a collection of over 300 varieties of Hawaiian Taro. Regretfully, when the caretaker of that garden passed away, the collection fell apart. Today several folks are putting the collection back together, but it will never be as extensive as it once was.
Below is a description of Hawaiian Taro from "The Hawaiian Planter" in both Hawaiian and English terms.
The environment it is in is fairly wet and moist on a regular basis, so that might explain the multiplication. Other places in the yard it is less invasive, normally because it's drier in that location.
I will go with the ID as Colocasia esculenta var. antiquorum. I think that's more than suitable given what we know and can see online about the plant. I appreciate everyone's input and responses - definitely lots to think about.
Dave's recommendation is excellent.
I realize that growers often prefer to use a common name since scientific terms and names often are uncomfortable to anyone without some training to grasp and use. I prefer plant names based in science since common names really mean nothing and frequently lead to confusion just as can be seen in this thread and many others on this forum along with many others.
Even though the "big words" may appear complicated, in the long run they always lead to a clearer understanding of a species or variation along with how it is grown by Mother Nature. As an example, many forms of Colocasia prefer to grow in or at the edge of water while others prefer drier zones. If you know the correct variation name you can learn that while a common name tells you zip!
One last note and I'll vacate my soap box.
I often see names posted on plants forums including Dave's Garden that imply a name is a registered cultivar. Any name in single quotes ('plantname xyz') implies the cultivar name is registered. Many growers add the single quotes automatically to a common name because they don't understand to be a registered cultivar the name MUST have been actually registered with the appropriate authority.
The official registrar for all aroids is the International Aroid Society. If the name you read in single quotes cannot be found here: http://www.aroid.org/cultivars/
it has never been registered according to a clearly published set of rules Begonias are registered by one organization, orchids by another and the IAS has been assigned with the task of registering aroids.
Some people have implied I am "haughty" because i try to point this out but I am honored to serve on the board of governors of the IAS and always try to help people understand the truth versus the myths of such subjects. If I appear to be a "snob" to you, I sincerely apologize. Most of those on this forum that truly know me know I am just like you, I just like to understand my plants and share accurate information. Some have made it clear in personal notes they would prefer I not post here so I have tried to be cautious about what I say, but then others write to me regularly and ask that I respond to particular threads.
Just take the time to click the link above and read the rules. Then try using the link on the same page to learn if some of the "cultivar" names you commonly use are in fact registered or just "made-up". You may be surprised how many names you know that don't really exist, someone (including many sellers) just made it up.
The IAS is here to serve all aroiders so feel free to use the IAS site. We would also love to see you join and I promise you will get more from the small amount you invest than you may think. Our next newsletter will be out in a few months and the IAS journal Aroideana will be out in August. In addition to some of the scientifically based articlesI know of an article by LariAnn almost all of you will enjoy that will be in that issue along with one I wrote with the assistance of Dr. Tom Croat that will help you understand many of the scientific terms most of you avoid reading. You will find all of those terms useful as well as telling you things about your plants you can't easily grasp without understanding their use. Please consider joining us: www.Aroid.org
Steve
Thanks Steve!
As I finally got paid for my last botany project, I just joined!
Aloha, Dave
And just seconds ago I received the notice you are now a valued member! There is a great deal of info on the IAS site not available to non-members and it always a pleasure to hear from you personally. If there are papers you are seeking and can't easily find just let me know, I have well over 200 in PDF format I am always glad to share!
You should already have my welcome letter in your mail box but take this as a great big thank you for joining! You do a great job of sharing good information with the participants of this forum and I hope the added information you can now easily access will help to give even more help to all those seeking it!
Steve
To Hawaiians, Taro is part of the Family!
Taro / Kalo grew from the body of Haloa, the brother of all Hawaiians.
Very interesting to see this info on Hawaiian Taro. I have read up on a lot of it but have found little from the Chinese and Fiji taro (dalo) forms and names.
The above Colocasia often shown and mentioned in the above post is Colocasia antiquorum often known for being invasive and an aquatic species. Their are hybrids of it with esculenta and is possibly a parent plant in the older Hawaiian and other hybrid eatable varieties. Known for bluish leaf with red dot in center of the leaf of mature plants and runners usually slightly narrow more sharp leaf than esculenta which is more rounder.
Depiction of Hawaiian Taro, by renowned Botanist of the mid-1900's, Otto Degener.
Hi Bwilliams!
The modern name for the plant is Colocasia esculenta var. antiquorum. Colocasia antiquorum is a synonym.
And that name would be perfectly acceptable as well Brian.
If anyone cares to do their homework either on the Missouri Botanical Garden's TROPICOS http://www.tropicos.org/NameSynonyms.aspx?nameid=2105982
or CATE Araceae which is a service of the Royal Botanic Garden Kew in London https://www.cate-araceae.org/taxon/5dce222a-6bfb-1014-a918-dc439151c9e5?view=966728f0-ae51-11dd-ad8b-0800200c9a66 you will find both the names Colocasia antiquorum (Schott), Colocasia esculenta var. antiquorum (Schott) C.E. Hubb. & Rehder are synonyms of the species Colocasia esculenta
https://www.cate-araceae.org/taxon/5dce222a-6bfb-1014-a918-dc439151c9e5?view=966728f0-ae51-11dd-ad8b-0800200c9a66
Any of these names can be used as long as the user understands there is only one base species with variation names due to natural variation. I did find some recent work on this subject by Pete Boyce and am sending him an email immediately for his clarification.
Steve
I just reaized you may receive a warning that the CATE Araceae site is dangerous. I have corresponded personally with the head of their computer department and this is nothing more than a "certificate" organizaiton trying to force the Kew to pay a fee for a new certificate. THE CATE SITE IS NOT DANGEROUS! I use it virtually daily as do almost all of the major aroid scientists in the world. I have never received anything dangerous from the Royal Botanic Garden Kew or CATE. Just click on the proceed button and visit the site!
Personally, I find it a great shame when someone out for nothing more than a demand for the extortion of a bribe can make a prestigious botanial garden appear to be a danger. There are hundreds of thousands of truly dangerous sites that never have such a warning posted!!
This message was edited May 8, 2010 10:33 AM
One of the most ancient of cultivated plants.
Fire was first utilized by humans to render inedible plants to edible, such as Taro!
