Copyright 1982 by the
Bromeliad Society, Inc.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
NOVEMBER — DECEMBER, 1982
PICTURE ON THE COVER
WILHELM WEBERWhen professor John Lindley first described Tillandsia rosea in the Botanical Register Vol. 16 (1830) and pictured it on plate 1357 he certainly could not have foreseen the confusion over this species in the next 150 years and the difficulties it would make for the various taxonomists as they tried to categorize it and interpret it. Especially in the years following the second world war, in which tillandsia collecting really became popular, the most varying species and forms have been and still are being seen as the "true" rosea and are being sold at prices that boggle the imagination. Only in the last two years, thanks to the rewarding collecting efforts of Mr. and Mrs. Hromadnik (Austria) and Mr. and Mrs. Ehlers (Federal Republic of Germany), have we been able to study blooming, living material and make comparisons, so that now there is finally a certain clarity about the classification of T. rosea and the species considered to be identical with it as far as can be determined in the face of missing type material.
But let me first depict the separate steps of this learning process as far as it has developed historically and has precipitated into the professional literature. So that the reader may be able to trace this path, I have included with this article the illustrations of the original plates and photographs of the species considered to be T. rosea Lindl.
We begin our investigation with the original description by John Lindley in the Botanical Register:
Pink-headed Tillandsia. Tillandsia rosea; foliis ligulatis acuminatis furfuraceis patentibus, spica ovata solitaria foliis vix longiore, bracteis ovatis concavis.
This extremely terse Latin description says: leaves ligulate, pointed, mealy (referring to the scale covering), spread; spikes oval, single, barely longer than the leaves; bracts oval, concave.
Then Lindley adds: "Our drawing of this undescribed species of tillandsia was made some years since, from a plant in the possession of the Marchioness of Bath. It flowered in the month of May, but having afforded only a single specimen, we had not an opportunity of examining it in detail. It is, however, distinguished sufficiently by its ovate head of flowers scarcely higher than the leafs, and bright pink bracteae. A native of Brazil."
So much for Lindley’s original description. Along with plate 1357 it is considered to be the type, since no herbarium specimen was kept. Note particularly that no information is given in the description about the flowers themselves and their color and that the flowers are also not shown on the plate!
|Tillandsia rosea Lindley 1830. Photograph of plate 1357 in the Botanical Register.|
The next step was the Austrian botanist J. G. Beer’s description of our species in his book Die Familie der Bromeliaceen (1859) as Anoplophytum roseum. He considered the present-day subgenus Anoplophytum to be a separate genus. But he described it only from the picture and Lindley’s text in the Botanical Register. He had no living plants or herbarium specimens at his disposal.
Then 32 years later in Baker’s Handbook of the Bromeliaceae (1889) we find Tillandsia rosea Lindl. 1830 together with Tillandsia recurvifolia listed as synonyms of Tillandsia dianthoidea Rossi (= T. aeranthos). The description of the flower color of T. rosea as white, which has subsequently always been repeated, begins with this listing in Baker’s book. Tillandsia recurvifolia was described by Hooker in the Botanical Magazine Vol. 87 and pictured in plate 5246. His original description is as follows:
Recurved-leaved Tillandsia. Tillandsia recurvifolia; foliis glaucescenti-lepidotis, e lata basi lanceolato-subulatis canaliculatis integerrimis, radicalibus insigniter recurvis, floralibus erecto-subpatentibus minus glaucis spicam aequantibus, scapo folioso brevissimo, spica late ovata subcapitata /axe bracteata, bracteis elliptico-oblongis acutissimis roseis, calycis albi laciniis lanceolatis mucronato-acutis basi in tubum unitis, corollae albae petalis spathulatis stamina superantibus filamentis supra medium crispato flexuosis.
|Tillandsia recurvifolia Hooker 1861. Photograph of plate 5246 in the Botanical Magazine.|
This is, as far as I can find, a new species of Tillandsia, evidently of the same group as, and nearly allied to, the pretty T. pulchella, figured in a late number of this Magazine, Tab. 5229, differing in the much broader, very glaucous, all very much recurved leaves, in the larger, almost sessile, and nearly ovate spikes of flowers, with much broader and pink-coloured, not red, bracts. We owe the possession of it to our friend, W. D. Christie, Esq., British Minister at Rio, who introduced it to Kew Gardens from Panama. I have already remarked, that easily as the Tillandsiae are to import living, and tenacious as they are of life, no plants are more difficult to preserve in cultivation for any length of time.
Descr. Stemless. Radical leaves copious, densely imbricating at their broad base and thence becoming lanceolato-subulate, three to four inches long, channeled, thickly clothed with minute scales, which give them a hoary and very glaucescent appearance; the interior and superior leaves, which immediately surround the inflorescence, are more erect, less glaucous, but broader, in proportion to the length, at their base. Scape very short, leafy, terminated by a broad ovate spike or capitulum of flowers, laxly imbricated with large broad-oblong, very acute, rose-coloured scales, sometimes tipped with yellowish-green. The white flowers force back the rose-coloured bracts, and protrude a very little beyond them. Calyx of three erect imbricating almost mucronate sepals, nearly as long as the corolla, united into a tube at their base. Petals pure white, with a spathulate limb and broad white claws. Stamens as long as the claws. Filaments linear-subulate, crisped and tortuose above the middle. Anthers small, linear. Ovary ovate, tapering into a thickened style, and terminated by three cuneate nearly erect stigmas. MAY 1st, 1861."
But as far as is known no herbarium specimen of T. recurvifolia Hook. 1861 was preserved, so that here too the original description and plate must serve as the type.
In contrast to Baker, Carl Mez considered Tillandsia rosea Lindl. 1830 as a variety of Tillandsia pulchella and described it in Martii Flora Brasiliensis III. 3. (1894) p. 603 and also in his first bromeliad monograph in DeCandolle, Monographiae Phanerogamarum Vol. 9 (1896) p. 825 as Tillandsia pulchella var. rosea. As synonyms he listed T. rosea Lindl. 1830, Anoplophytum roseum Beer 1857 and T. recurvifolia Hook 1861. As a habitat he cites Guyana (?) and also lists the following herbarium documentation: Bolivia, ad Soratam, alt. 2650 m: Mandon n. 1184, M. Bang n. 1628. According to L.B. Smith in Flora Neotropica (1977) these two specimens are identical with T. tenuifolia L.
|Type specimen of Tillandsia langsdorffii Mez 1894.|
However, in his second monograph in Engler’s Pflanzenreich (1935) Carl Mez again cites T. recurvifolia Hook. as valid and further lists as synonyms T. langsdorffii Mez 1894 (?), T. rosea Lindl. 1830, Anoplophytum roseum Beer 1857 and T. pulchella var. rosea (Lindl.) Mez 1894. As herbarium documentation he cites only the specimen in the Leningrad herbarium, which was the basis of his description of T. langsdorffii in the Flora Brasiliensis in 1894, and adds: "As a habitat Panama is cited; this is incorrect. The plant comes from Brazil, state of Rio de Janeiro (Langsdorff)." Compare this habitat information (Panama) above to that of the original description of Tillandsia recurvifolia Hook. 1861; I will return to this fact at the end of the article.
This is the extent of the knowledge about our mysterious T. rosea Lindl. shortly before the second world war, and just 10 years after the end of the war we find it revalidated by L. B. Smith in Bromeliaceae of Brazil (1955) and synonyms Anoplophytum roseum (Lindl.) Beer 1857, T. recurvifolia Hook. 1861, T. langsdorffii Mez 1894 and T. pulchella var. rosea (Lindl.) Mez 1894 listed. As herbarium documentation he cites: Rio de Janeiro: Langsdorff (LE) and Teresopolis: Brade and Pereira 20062 (RB, US).
Now we have arrived at the time when the Bromeliad Society was founded and bromeliad cultivation spread quickly in America and in Europe and great collections of living plants came about outside the botanical gardens. More and more growers have done their own collecting in the tropics and plants have appeared designated the "true T. rosea," among which is a hard, secund-leafed tillandsia, which grows along with T. sprengeliana on vertical cliff sides in the Organ Mountains near Rio de Janeiro. Alfred Blass presented it as Tillandsia rosea Lindl. in the Journal of the Bromeliad Society Vol. 28 (1978) p. 32-34 with a color photograph. The same species was earlier pictured in Walter Richter’s book Zimmerpflanzen von heute und morgen — Bromeliaceen as T. regnellii.
|Tillandsia carminea Till 1981.|
|Tillandsia neglecta Pereira 1971.|
If one compares the illustrations of this plant with Lindley’s original plate from the Botanical Register one easily sees that it is not identical with T. rosea Lindl. 1830! This tillandsia was described by Walter Till in Plant Systematics and Evolution 138 (1981) p. 293-295 as Tillandsia carminea sp. n., holotype: Brazil, State of Rio de Janeiro, Serra dos Orgaos SE of Teresopolis, 1950 msm, leg. Dr. H. et L. Hromadnik Nr. 6160, Aug. 1980 (WU). I also have at my disposal a topotype of this species, leg. R. Ehlers, 1900 msm, July 1981 (WEB 265). In the second edition (1981) of Prof. Rauh’s book Bromelien, Tillandsia carminea Till 1981 is still described as T. rosea Lindl. 1830 and pictured in a black-and-white photograph; but again the white flowers are mentioned. T. carminea, however, blooms blue-violet as does T. stricta and based on the flower parts is hardly distinguishable from it.
In L. B. Smith’s monograph in Flora Neotropica 14.1. (1977) p. 822, T. rosea Lindl. 1830 is still cited as valid and as synonyms are given Anoplophytum roseum (Lindl.) Beer 1857, T. recurvifolia Hook. 1861 and T. pulchella var. rosea (Lindl.) Mez 1894. On the other hand T. langsdorffii Mez 1894 has been removed from the list of synonyms. The accompanying photograph of the Leningrad type specimen of T. langsdorffii reveals at the bottom right that L. B. Smith was able to examine this type only as late as 1959 and determined it to be identical with T. stricta Sol. ex Ker-Gawl. 1813. As herbarium documentation of T. rosea he cites: Brazil, Rio de Janeiro, Serra dos Orgaos, Teresopolis, Sept. 1949, Brade and Pereira 20062 (RB, US): April 1959, Abendroth 109 (US); 117 (US); Ponta do Forte, Arraial do Cabo, Cabo Frio, Jul. 1965, Segadas-Vianna 4320 (R, US). A hatch drawing after Segadas-Vianna 4320 is reproduced as Fig. 258 D - E, but here, too, a comparison with Lindley’s plate shows that the two are not identical.
In 1981 Frau Renate Ehlers scoured the cliff walls of Cabo Frio for tillandsias that could be identical with T. rosea Lindl. but found only T. sprengeliana and the same saxicolous form as Segadas-Vianna 4320; the latter, however, after careful studies has been found to be identical with Tillandsia neglecta Pereira 1971, described in Bradea 1, p. 78, pl. 2, holotype: Cabo Frio, D. Sucre s.n. (HB 50230).
In Flora Neotropica L. B. Smith places T. neglecta Pereira as a synonym for T. tenuifolia var. surinamensis (but with a question mark). The specimens which I examined (WEB 324 and living material, leg. R. Ehlers, Jul. 1981, Cabo Frio) regularly show, however, only a few fused sepals and accordingly do not belong to the polymorphic T. tenuifolia, whose posterior sepals are always fused. T. neglecta Pereira is more probably related to T. stricta Solander ex Ker-Gawler 1813, but distinct from it. (The original description of T. stricta Sol. is designated with G. According to information from Dr. Vickery, British Museum, that is the sign of Ker-Gawler).
We have now determined that a "true" Tillandsia rosea Lindl. can not be identified up to this point. So what sort of plant had Lindley described and pictured? In contrast to the earlier taxonomists we today are in the lucky position of being able to study and compare a large number of living plants in collections. For example, a population of the variable T. stricta is found near Teresopolis, which in its non-blooming stage totally resembles Lindley’s picture. It also has the short flower scape, so that the inflorescence is hardly longer than the leaves, a feature which is considered significant for T. rosea along with the white flowers. Walter Till also mentions that in the introduction to his description of Tillandsia carminea and he writes: "In examining the original description of T. rosea Lindley (1830) it has been determined, however, that the plant is merely a T. stricta Solander not yet in full bloom. An examination of L. B. Smith’s (1977) listing of synonyms for T. rosea, T. pulchella Hooker var. rosea (Lindley) Mez in Martius and T. Recurvifolia Hooker has shown that both belong to the quite variable T. tenuifolia L. Thus it was necessary to withdraw the name T. rosea and to describe the present species anew."
But Herr Till is mistaken here insofar as T. pulchella v. rosea can not be considered a synonym for T. tenuifolia, because Mez based his T. pulchella var. rosea on T. rosea Lindl., and if this becomes synonymous with T. stricta then automatically T. pulchella var. rosea, and Anoplophytum roseum Beer also become synonymous with T. stricta, but not T. recurvifolia Hook. 1861, whose identity we have not yet clarified!
Thus the synonym list for T. stricta should be extended as follows:
|Tillandsia stricta Solander ex Ker-Gawler 1813|
|adde Syn.:||T. rosea Lindley 1830||Anoplophytum roseum Beer 1857||T. pulchella var. rosea (Lindl.) Mez 1894||T. recurvifolia sensu Mez et alior p.p., non Hooker 1861.|
Tillandsia stricta has long been known as the most common Brazilian tillandsia and it is baffling to us today that Lindley described a T. stricta not yet in full bloom. The solution to the puzzle is probably that Lindley in his time did not know T. stricta and mistakenly described in 1830 in the Botanical Register with an illustration on plate 1338 Till. aeranthos as T. stricta, and thus the real T. stricta must have appeared new to him and he described it as T. rosea.
Now we must explain which species Hooker described as T. recurvifolia. As we saw, Hooker in his description said that it was closely related to T. pulchella (today T. tenuifolia), and this remark probably caused Till to think of it as a synonym for T. tenuifolia. But if we observe the sentence in the description "Calyx . . . united into a tube at the base", and compare the depiction of the flowers with the sepals (fig. 1), then we see clearly that the sepals are in today’s parlance "equally subfree or short connate," and that the inferior sepals are not at all fused highly as in T. tenuifolia! On this point the identity of T. recurvifolia is clearly distinguished from T. tenuifolia.
The habitat citation is also puzzling. Hooker writes that the plant was sent to Kew from Panama by W. D. Christie. But as mentioned above, Mez excluded this possibility. Now a comparison of citations of other herbarium specimens of various Bromeliaceae shows that Christie never collected plants in Panama, but had collected several in Parana! In Hooker’s time there were no typewriters and Hooker’s handwritten manuscript was possibly the cause of this distortion by the typesetter.
Now the area of the species in question is narrowed to southern Brazil and Argentina. (Christie also collected T. vernicosa and T. ixioides with the notation "Parana". According to the distribution of T. ixioides, then, the note does not refer to the Brazilian state Parana and not to the river either, but probably to the city Parana in the province Entre Rios in Argentina!) From these two areas the only white-flowered tillandsias of this general form would be an albino form of T. stricta or T. meridionalis. The white-flowered T. pohliana Mez is clearly different and can be excluded. But for an albino T. stricta the petals appear to be too wide and too recurved. Also for T. stricta the long, awl-like blades of the lower flower bracts are missing. There is a closer resemblance to T. meridionalis Baker 1888 — except for the atypically short inflorescence scape, which, however, may have been somewhat stunted by transportation conditions and cultivation in Kew. We note this phenomenon even today in some plants that have not received optimal care.
A difference still not explained is the unmentioned typical scaling of the sepals in T. meridionalis. But this can stem from the fact that the depiction of the scaling afforded difficulties to the artist. Even on the leaves there is no indication of scaling in the drawing, although Hooker mentions them expressly in his description. Hooker may have overlooked them on the sepals or considered them insignificant. Afterall, there are forms of T. meridionalis with only slight scaling only at the tip of the sepals.
Therefore it is best to consider T. recurvifolia Hook. 1861 as probably identical with T. meridionalis Baker 1888, although there is no possibility of an exact test, since, as mentioned above, there is probably no type specimen of T. recurvifolia preserved for examination.
Translated by Harvey L. Kendall
Waldsteinberg, German Democratic Republic
AMY JEAN GILMARTINThe following key was constructed to all of the species of Tillandsia Subgenus Phytarrhiza with the aid of Pankhurst’s (1978) computer programs for key generation. While keys to these species are already available in Smith and Downs (1977) for aiding plant identification, this key may be easier to use. Species of the Subgenus Phytarrhiza are of particular interest to bromeliad growers. The Subgenus is characterized by large, conspicuous petals and short styles, no longer than the ovary.
An additional advantage to the following key is that the data that produced it are in tabular form on computer storage and can be changed easily or added to and the programs run for about $1.50 to produce an improved key. I welcome suggestions, changes, deletions, additions to the information shown in the key.
|1||Leaf-blade indumentum of spreading scales.||2|
|2||Leaf-blade apex not narrowly recurved.||3|
|3||Sepals not equally free.||4|
|4||Scape curved or nodding in part, plant height to 20 cm.||5|
|5||Scape-bracts imbricate, inflorescence compound, inflorescence not simple, floral bracts exceeding sepals, floral bract not shorter than or equaling sepals, floral bracts other than ovate or triangular, keel of floral bracts present, sepals not equally united, sepals posteriorly connate, sepals not nerved, petal blade erect, petal never blue or purple, petal white or yellow, sepal may exceed 1.5 cm in length, sepal 1.6 to 2.5 cm long.||T. cacticola|
|5||Scape-bracts not imbricate throughout, inflorescence not compound, inflorescence simple, floral bracts not exceeding sepals, floral bract shorter than or equaling sepals, floral bracts ovate-triangular, keel of floral bracts absent, sepals equally united, sepals not posteriorly connate, sepals nerved, petal blade not erect, petal blue or purple, petal never white or yellow, sepal not exceeding 1.5 cm long, sepal not 1.6 to 2.5 cm long.||T. bandensis|
|4||Scape erect, plant height 36 to 50 cm, or more than 50 cm.||6|
|6||Plant height 36 to 50 cm, leaf-blade apex not attenuate or filiform, inflorescence compound, spike width more than 2 cm, rhachis exposed at least in part, floral bracts ovate-triangular, sepals not equally united, sepals posteriorly connate, sepals nerved, petal white or yellow, sepal may exceed 1.5 cm in length, sepal 1.6 to 2.5 cm long, leaf not polystichous along elongate stem.||T. straminea|
|6||Plant height more than 50 cm, leaf-blade apex attenuate or filiform, inflorescence not compound, spike width not more than 2 cm, rhachis not exposed, floral bracts other than ovate or triangular, sepals equally united, sepals not posteriorly connate, sepals not nerved, petal never white or yellow, sepal not exceeding 1.5 cm long, sepal not 1.6 to 2.5 cm long, leaf polystichous along elongate stem.||T. arhiza|
|3||Sepals equally free.||7|
|7||Plant height more than 50 cm, inflorescence simple.||8|
|8||Scape-bracts imbricate, inflorescence not compound, floral bracts erect, rhachis not exposed, floral bracts exceeding sepals, floral bracts elliptic, nerves of floral bracts present, sepals nerved, petal blades much exceeding 6-7 mm broad, petal blade not erect, petal blue or purple, petal never white or yellow.||T. paleacea|
|8||Scape-bracts not imbricate throughout, inflorescence compound, floral bracts spreading, not erect, rhachis exposed at least in part, floral bracts not exceeding sepals, floral bracts other than elliptic, nerves of floral bracts absent, sepals not nerved, petal blades to 6-7 mm, petal blade erect, petal never blue or purple, petal white or yellow.||T. schunkei|
|7||Plant height 36 to 50 cm, inflorescence not simple.||9|
|9||Spike width more than 2 cm, number of flowers per spike not more than 20, rhachis exposed at least in part, floral bracts ovate-triangular, floral bracts elliptic, floral bracts other than lanceolate, floral bract with spreading scales, sepals nerved, petal blades much exceeding 6-7 mm broad, petal blade erect, sepal may exceed 1.5 cm in length, sepal 1.6 to 2.5 cm long, leaf not polystichous along elongate stem, sepal indumentum with spreading scales.||T. humilis|
|9||Spike width not more than 2 cm, number of flowers per spike more than 20, rhachis not exposed, floral bracts other than ovate or triangular, floral bracts other than elliptic, floral bracts lanceolate, floral bract sparsely lepidote or glabrous, sepals not nerved, petal blades to 6-7 mm, petal blade not erect, sepal not exceeding 1.5 cm long, sepal not 1.6 to 2.5 long, leaf polystichous along elongate stem, sepal indumentum sparsely lepidote or glabrous.||T. streptocarpa|
|2||Leaf-blade apex narrowly recurved.||10|
|10||Scape-bracts not imbricate throughout.||11|
|11||Rhachis not exposed, floral bracts ovate-triangular, floral bracts other than elliptic, leaf distichous.||12|
|12||Plant height to 20 cm, sepals equally united, sepals not posteriorly connate, petal blades to 6-7 mm, petal blue or purple, petal never white or yellow, sepal indumentum sparsely lepidote or glabrous.||T. mallemontii|
|12||Plant height 21 to 35 cm, sepals not equally united, sepals posteriorly connate, petal blades much exceeding 6-7 mm broad, petal never blue or purple, petal white or yellow, sepal indumentum with spreading scales.||T. crocata|
|11||Rhachis exposed at least in part, floral bracts other than ovate or triangular, floral bracts elliptic, leaf polystichous.||13|
|13||Floral bracts erect, floral bracts not exceeding sepals, nerves of floral bracts absent, sepals equally free, sepals not equally united, sepals not nerved, petal blades much exceeding 6-7 mm broad, petal never blue or purple, petal white or yellow, sepal indumentum with spreading scales.||T. aurea|
|13||Floral bracts spreading, not erect, floral bracts exceeding sepals, nerves of floral bracts present, sepals not equally free, sepals equally united, sepals nerved, petal blades to 6-7 mm, petal blue or purple, petal never white or yellow, sepal indumentum sparsely lepidote or glabrous.||T. caerulea|
|14||Leaf-blade apex not attenuate or filiform, number of flowers per spike more than 20.||15|
|15||Plant height 21 to 35 cm, rhachis exposed at least in part, floral bracts other than ovate or triangular, floral bract sparsely lepidote or glabrous, nerves of floral bracts present, sepals equally free, sepals not equally united, sepals not nerved, petal blades to 6-7 mm.||T. reichenbachii|
|15||Plant height more than 50 cm, rhachis not exposed, floral bracts ovate-triangular, floral bract with spreading scales, nerves of floral bracts absent, sepals not equally free, sepals equally united, sepals nerved, petal blades much exceeding 6-7 mm broad.||T. duratii|
|14||Leaf-blade apex attenuate or filiform, number of flowers per spike not more than 20.||16|
|16||Plant height more than 50 cm, spike width more than 2 cm, floral bracts lanceolate.||T. purpurea|
|16||Plant height to 20 cm, spike width not more than 2 cm, floral bracts other than lanceolate.||17|
|17||Rhachis exposed at least in part, floral bracts not exceeding sepals, floral bract shorter than or equaling sepals, floral bracts other than ovate or triangular, floral bracts elliptic, floral bract sparsely lepidote or glabrous, petal blades much exceeding 6-7 mm broad, petal white or yellow, sepal not 1.6 to 2.5 cm long.||T. peiranoi|
|17||Rhachis not exposed, floral bracts exceeding sepals, floral bract not shorter than or equaling sepals, floral bracts ovate-triangular, floral bracts other than elliptic, floral bract with spreading scales, petal blades to 6-7 mm, petal never white or yellow, sepal 1.6 to 2.5 cm long.||T. rupicola|
|1||Leaf-blade indumentum glabrous to appressed lepidote.||18|
|18||Leaf-blade width more than 15 mm.||19|
|19||Floral bracts exceeding sepals, floral bract not shorter than or equaling sepals.||20|
|20||Plant height more than 50 cm, petal white or yellow.||21|
|21||Leaf-blades not ligulate, leaf-blade apex attenuate or filiform, leaf-blade apex not broad or apiculate, inflorescence not compound, inflorescence simple, number of flowers per spike not more than 20, floral bracts erect, rhachis not exposed, floral bracts other than ovate or triangular, floral bracts elliptic, petal blades much exceeding 6-7 mm broad, petal blue or purple, stamens exceeding pistil, sepal not 1.6 to 2.5 cm long, sepal 2.6-4 cm long.||T. lindenii|
|21||Leaf-blades ligulate, leaf-blade apex not attenuate or filiform, leaf-blade apex broad or apiculate, inflorescence compound, inflorescence not simple, number of flowers per spike more than 20, floral bracts spreading, not erect, rhachis exposed at least in part, floral bracts ovate-triangular, floral bracts other than elliptic, petal blades to 6-7 mm, petal never blue or purple, stamens not exceeding pistil, sepal 1.6 to 2.5 cm long, sepal not 2.6 to 4 cm long.||T. dyeriana|
|20||Plant height 36 to 50 cm, petal never white or yellow.||22|
|22||Leaf-blade not ligulate, leaf-blade apex attenuate or filiform, leaf-blade apex not acute, inflorescence not compound, inflorescence simple, spike width more than 2 cm, floral bracts spreading, not erect, rhachis exposed at least in part, nerves of floral bracts absent, sepals equally free, sepals not equally united, sepals nerved, petal blades much exceeding 6-7 mm broad, sepal not 1.6 to 2.5 cm long, sepal 2.6-4 cm long.||T. pretiosa|
|22||Leaf-blades ligulate, leaf-blade apex not attenuate or filiform, leaf-blade apex acute, inflorescence compound, inflorescence not simple, spike not more than 2 cm, floral bracts erect, rhachis not exposed, nerves of floral bracts present, sepals not equally free, sepals equally united, sepals not nerved, petal blades to 6-7 mm, sepal 1.6 to 2.5 cm long, sepal not 2.6 to 4 cm long.||T. wagneriana|
|19||Floral bracts not exceeding sepals, floral bract shorter than or equaling sepals.||23|
|23||Leaf-blade apex acute, plant height to 20 cm, or more than 50 cm, leaf-blade apex not broad or apiculate, texture of floral bracts coriaceous, texture of floral bracts coriaceous, sepals nerved.||24|
|24||Plant height to 20 cm, number of flowers per spike not more than 20, sepals equally united, sepal not exceeding 1.5 cm long, sepal not 2.6 to 4 cm long.||T. laxissima|
|24||Plant height more than 50 cm, number of flowers per spike more than 20, sepals not equally united, sepal may exceed 1.5 cm in length, sepal 2.6-4 cm long.||T. platyrhachis|
|23||Leaf-blade apex not acute, plant height 36 to 50 cm, leaf-blade apex broad or apiculate, texture of floral bracts membranaceous or chartaceous, texture of floral bracts membranaceous or chartaceous, sepals not nerved.||25|
|25||Scape-bracts not imbricate throughout, floral bracts other than ovate or triangular, floral bracts elliptic, keel of floral bracts absent, petal never blue or purple, sepal not exceeding 1.5 cm long, sepal not 1.6 to 2.5 cm long.||T. venusta|
|25||Scape-bracts imbricate, floral bracts ovate-triangular, floral bracts other than elliptic, keel of floral bracts present, petal blue or purple, sepal may exceed 1.5 cm in length, sepal 1.6 to 2.5 cm long.||26|
|26||Floral bracts erect, rhachis not exposed, petal blade not erect, petal white or yellow.||T. hamaleana|
|26||Floral bracts spreading, not erect, rhachis exposed at least in part, petal blade erect, petal never white or yellow.||T. nubis|
|18||Leaf-blade width to 15 mm.||27|
|27||Floral bracts spreading, not erect.||28|
|28||Floral bracts exceeding sepals, plant height more than 50 cm, floral bract not shorter than or equaling sepals, keel of floral bracts absent, petal blades much exceeding 6-7 mm broad.||29|
|29||Sepals equally free, sepals not equally united, petal blade not erect, sepal not exceeding 1.5 cm long, sepal 1.6 to 2.5 cm long, sepal not 2.6 to 4 cm long.||T. dodsonii|
|29||Sepals not equally free, sepals equally united, petal blade erect, sepal may exceed 1.5 cm in length, sepal not 1.6 to 2.5 cm long, sepal 2.6-4 cm long.||T. acosta-solisii|
|28||Floral bracts not exceeding sepals, plant height 21 to 35 cm, or 36 to 50 cm, floral bract shorter than or equaling sepals, keel of floral bracts present, petal blades to 6-7 mm.||30|
|30||Plant height 21 to 35 cm, sepals not nerved, sepal may exceed 1.5 cm in length, sepal 1.6 to 2.5 cm long.||T. monadelpha|
|30||Plant height 36 to 50 cm, sepals nerved, sepal not exceeding 1.5 cm long, sepal not 1.6 to 2.5 cm long.||31|
|31||Floral bracts ovate-triangular, floral bracts other than elliptic, sepals equally free, sepals not equally united, petal blade erect.||T. scaligera|
|31||Floral bracts other than ovate or triangular, floral bracts elliptic, sepals not equally free, sepals equally united, petal blade not erect.||T. narthecioides|
|27||Floral bracts erect.||32|
|32||Plant height 36 to 50 cm.||33|
|33||Rhachis exposed at least in part, floral bracts not exceeding sepals, floral bract shorter than or equaling sepals, keel of floral bracts absent, floral bract strictly green, sepals posteriorly connate, petal never blue or purple, sepal 1.6 to 2.5 cm long, sepal not 2.6 to 4 cm long, capsule not to 3 cm long.||T. cornuta|
|33||Rhachis not exposed, floral bracts exceeding sepals, floral bract not shorter than or equaling sepals, keel of floral bracts present, floral bract with some color, sepals not posteriorly connate, petal blue or purple, sepal not 1.6 to 2.5 cm long, sepal 2.6-4 cm long, capsule to 3 cm long.||T. anceps|
|32||Plant height 21 to 35 cm.||34|
|34||Scape curved or nodding in part, texture of floral bracts coriaceous, texture of floral bracts coriaceous, floral bract with some color, nerves of floral bracts absent.||T. cyanea|
|34||Scape erect, texture of floral bracts membranaceous or chartaceous, texture of floral bracts membranaceous or chartaceous, floral bract strictly green, nerves of floral bracts present.||35|
|35||Spike width more than 2 cm, number of flowers per spike not more than 20, rhachis not exposed, floral bracts not exceeding sepals, floral bracts other than ovate or triangular, floral bracts elliptic, keel of floral bracts present, sepals equally free, sepals not equally united, petal blue or purple, sepal may exceed 1.5 cm in length, sepal 2.6-4 cm long.||T. umbellata|
|35||Spike width not more than 2 cm, number of flowers per spike more than 20, rhachis exposed at least in part, floral bracts exceeding sepals, floral bracts ovate-triangular, floral bracts other than elliptic, keel of floral bracts absent, sepals not equally free, sepals equally united, petal never blue or purple, sepal not exceeding 1.5 cm long, sepal not 2.6 to 4 cm long.||T. triglochinoides|
Pankhurst, R. 1979. Key
Constructing Program, Version 2 mark 4. Program written in Fortran IV for
the IBM 370/165. Distributed by the author, Botany Department, British Museum
of Natural History, London, S. W. 7 5BD.
Smith, L. and J. Downs. 1977.
Tillandsioideae (Bromeliaceae) Flora Neotropica Monogr. No. 14, Part 2,
Smith, L. and J. Downs. 1977. Tillandsioideae (Bromeliaceae) Flora Neotropica Monogr. No. 14, Part 2, pp. 663-1492.
Washington State University, Pullman, Washington
ELMER J. LORENZ
A beautiful bromeliad growing on a jungle tree top may remain unknown for many years until someone collects and brings it back for all of us to appreciate. The same is true of the former Editor of our Journal. With the exception of a few, our previous Editor was known only in print and as Victoria Padilla, Editor. It is hoped this brief narration will sufficiently inform the members so our prior Editor is known to be more than printed words, but a beautiful person who has brought us many hours of pleasure through her numerous contributions to The Bromeliad Society, Inc.
|Victoria Padilla in her garden.|
Early in 1948 Joseph Schneider of San Gabriel, California, wrote to Miss Kemble, organizer of Round Robins for the magazine Flower Grower, asking if she could get a group together who were interested in bromeliads. She placed a call for members in the February, 1948 issue, to which Victoria Padilla responded immediately.
She was followed by eight others, and they, in turn, by four more.
There is no doubt that since that eventful 1948 no one individual has given more time, interest, energy, concern and leadership to the growing interest in bromeliads and to The Bromeliad Society, Inc., than Victoria Padilla — to whom we are forever grateful.
Victoria was the director of the Round Robin and guided the group in exchanging their experiences with bromeliads through correspondence with one another for almost two years.
During the spring of 1950, an invitation was sent out to all members of the Round Robin and others interested in bromeliads to attend a get together on May 21, to discuss the suggestion made by Joseph Schneider that a Bromeliad Society be formed.
View of Victoria Padilla’s garden showing part of her extensive bromeliad collection.
On September 17, 1950 an organizational meeting was held at the home of Frank and Lucille Overton in Glendale, California. Twenty-one prospective members attended the meeting. The highlight and surprise of the meeting was the appearance of Mulford B. Foster, who had been personally invited by Mr. David Barry, Jr. to attend the organizational meeting. Most of us present at the meeting were unaware that Mr. Foster was going to appear. Mulford was hidden in a back closet with Victoria until he was introduced to the group when the meeting began!
During the first meeting, the officers elected were Mulford B. Foster, President, David Barry, Jr., First Vice-President, Russell J. Seibert, Second Vice-President, Victoria Padilla, Secretary and Frank H. Overton, Treasurer. Victoria was also elected to the Board of Directors at this time.
The Bromeliad Society Bulletin (now the Journal of the Bromeliad Society) made its appearance in 1951 with the January-February issue. Volume I, Number 1, consisted almost entirely of an article by Mulford B. Foster, entitled "A Message From the President." It dealt with the organizational meeting, the objectives and aims of the new Society, etc. The Bulletin contained one other short article entitled "Note From the Secretary" and gave a description of the Bromeliad Insignia designed by Mulford B. Foster — the article was written by Victoria Padilla. This makes Victoria the first contributor to the Society’s journal other than the Editor.
Victoria was Secretary and later Editorial Secretary of The Bromeliad Society for many years. However, it was when she became Editor of the Bulletin of the Bromeliad Society with the November-December, 1960, Vol. X. No. 6, issue of the journal that she began to make her greatest contributions to The Bromeliad Society, Inc.
The Journal is the cornerstone of The Bromeliad Society, Inc. It is the one feature that holds the whole structure of the Society together, making the Editor the most important member of the Society. The enthusiasm or lack of enthusiasm of the Editor can make the society, through its Journal, a success or failure. Victoria, through her determination and enthusiasm, surely made The Bromeliad Society a successful organization for the many years she was its Editor.
The assignment as editor of a journal dedicated to a ‘One Plant Society’ is not an easy one. The Bromeliad Society is no exception. The Editor of the Journal of the Bromeliad Society is responsible to collect, prepare and arrange informative, educational, instructive, and descriptive material pertaining to, or associated with, bromeliads. It is necessary that this combination be balanced in order for each issue to satisfy the beginning amateur grower and the advanced amateur grower.
The herculean task of issuing a journal six times a year that would fulfill the expectations of all the members of the Society, is an ‘impossible dream,’ but Victoria did an excellent job in meeting the challenge. The one major detail not realized or ignored by the membership is that a journal can be no better than the articles submitted — in number and quality.
Some members of the first
Board of Directors of the Bromeliad Society, Inc. Reading from left to right|
(back row) Morris Schick, Director; Dr. Russell Seibert, Second Vice President; Frank Overton, Treasurer;
(front row) Victoria Padilla, Secretary; Mulford Foster, President; David Barry, Jr., First Vice President.
The photo was taken at the home of the Secretary in Los Angeles at the 1952 Board meeting.
Victoria Padilla, having been a teacher of business English at the college level, was very demanding that articles submitted have proper grammatical construction, correct punctuation, and proper spelling, plus being informative and instructive. Often she would have to severely edit an article or rewrite portions to meet her standards of acceptance for publication in the Journal. She was at times criticized for this editing, but Victoria always had the high standards for the Journal uppermost in her mind. She would not ‘bend over backwards’ and give in to the author’s whims.
Victoria was just as demanding in the selection of photographs submitted for publication in the Journal. She, along with her brother, Jules Padilla, a professional photographer, would carefully screen all illustrations submitted before making the selection for publication. Jules Padilla also took many of the pictures used to illustrate the Journal.
Understanding the personality and background of Victoria is an important key to the understanding of her job as Editor. Included with her experience as a teacher, is Victoria’s remarkable knowledge and great love of bromeliads. The combination of these important factors adds up to making an excellent Editor of the Journal of The Bromeliad Society. It is with great pride that we in California can broadcast that California’s contribution to the Bromeliad Society is Victoria Padilla, and the fact that The Bromeliad Society was organized in California.
Many times Victoria has written a number of letters to various individuals asking for, or even pleading, for articles. The response in most instances was negative. Occasionally she would get an answer or two with the promise of an article. Often times she would get no response to her numerous letters requesting articles. Many is the time Victoria had to compose an article or two to complete an issue of the Journal. No one has contributed more to the Journal than Victoria. To verify this, all one has to do is turn to The Cumulative Index to The Bulletin and Journal of The Bromeliad Society, published by The Reed Herbarium, Contribution No. XXIX, and note that eight pages of contributions by Victoria Padilla are listed — no other individual in the Society has approached that number.
Victoria’s contributions to The Bromeliad Society are not limited to being Secretary and Editor. She is responsible for the publication of several books on bromeliads. The first book was Bromeliads In Color and Their Culture. It was a compilation by Victoria Padilla of articles and photographs from the Bulletin of The Bromeliad Society. The book was published in 1966 and is now very rare, having been out of print for many years. Two other books have been written by Victoria and have become very popular. Bromeliads is accepted as the horticultural authority for bromeliad growers as it is one of the best reference books available for the amateur grower. It is now in its sixth printing.
Next came The Colorful Bromeliads — Their Infinite Variety. This book is primarily a picture book of beautiful bromeliads. The comments expand the usefulness of the book by giving descriptions of plants, background information, in addition to the beautiful photographs.
Victoria also compiled A Bromeliad Glossary to assist the amateur bromeliad grower in defining some of the more technical botanical terms used in the Journal of The Bromeliad Society.
The International Checklist of Bromeliad Hybrids was gathered together by Victoria to meet one of the important requirements necessary for The Bromeliad Society, Inc., to become the International Registration Authority for Bromeliads.
Victoria was responsible for the ground work of establishing The Mulford B. Foster Bromeliad Identification Center at The Marie Selby Botanical Garden in Sarasota, Florida.
During a visit to Florida in 1978, Victoria investigated the facilities of The Marie Selby Botanical Garden as a possible location for a bromeliad identification center. After an enlightening conversation with Dr. Calloway Dodson, Research Director of The Marie Selby Botanical Garden, Victoria returned to California full of enthusiasm for the establishment of the identification center in Sarasota, Florida. She presented a detailed report to me, and I, as President of The Bromeliad Society, Inc., began the formal procedures to have The Bromeliad Society’s Identification Center established in Sarasota, Florida at The Marie Selby Botanical Garden. After many years of debating, investigation and searching, the Identification Center was finally established and became an important function of the Bromeliad Society, Inc. After the death of Mulford B. Foster, the Identification Center was renamed The Mulford B. Foster Identification Center in his memory."
Victoria accepted no remuneration from The Bromeliad Society for her services as Editor of the Journal.
This article is but a brief resume of Victoria’s contributions to The Bromeliad Society. The real contributions are forever enshrined in the 121 issues of the Bulletin and Journal of the Bromeliad Society that Victoria edited and the books she authored.
A small group of members of The Bromeliad Society gathered at the home of Victoria on July 25, 1982. The occasion of the momentous meeting was to present Victoria a gift on behalf of ALL the members of The Bromeliad Society, Inc., in recognition of her many years of service and dedication to the Society. This was done upon request of the Board of Directors of The Bromeliad Society, Inc.
Victoria retired as Editor with the November-December, 1981, issue of the Journal and Victoria now has many additional hours she can spend with and enjoy her bromeliads and other plants.
Los Angeles, California
ERVIN J. WURTHMANN
Whenever seen for the first time, this species attracts attention, frequently prompting remarks such as "It’s an orthophytum, not a cryptanthus" or "It could be a hechtia."
Cryptanthus warasii (the "w" is pronounced as a "v") came into my possession in June, 1978. The stiff, silvery foliage with very prominent spines makes it a striking and attractive small plant usually less than 8 in. in diameter.
Many species of Cryptanthus prefer moderate light with good moisture and humidity. C. warasii was discovered growing on rock domes, tolerates much light and it also gets along with less humidity than some of the other species and hybrids. It is considerably slower growing than other cryptanthus and is less generous with offshoots.
My growing medium consists of peat moss, shredded bark, Perlite and some builders’ sand. Since it is terrestrial, a balanced fertilizer, dry or soluble, in small quantities would be beneficial.
This plant could easily fit into a cactus and succulent garden where frosts are not a problem. Growers in areas of low humidity may find this species more amenable to cultivation than some others. The accompanying illustration shows its unusual and attractive character. Cryptanthus warasii has flair!
SUE GARDNERThe beauty of Bromeliads has intercultural appeal. Although the majority of the members of the Bromeliad Society, Inc. live in the temperate parts of the world, or are of European ancestry, appreciation of the beauty of these epiphytes cuts across cultural boundaries. The use of the most colorful of these species as decoration by indigenous people of tropical america has been previously noted. Andre discovered Guzmania sanguinea being used to adorn a rustic cross in Colombia in 1876, and subsequently described it as a new species. In the rural regions of Mexico tillandsias are often found decorating shrines and churches. Fritz Kubisch has shown slides to several bromeliad societies of Tillandsia prodigiosa hanging in masses from the ceiling of a church near Oaxaca. It is not unusual to see flowering tillandsias for sale in village markets or in fruit stands along the roadsides in various parts of Mexico. T. imperialis is another favorite for decoration, especially at Christmas time.
One of the most spectacular occasions where we have witnessed flowering bromeliads being collected by the Mexicans, was Christmas week in San Cristobal de las Casas, Chiapas, in 1979. During a one week stay there we watched women and children from one of the local groups of indians that is descended from the ancient Maya, as they carried large sheaves of flowering T. guatemalensis and T. ponderosa to market. Walking barefoot in the chill and fog of early morning in the 7,000 ft. + elevation, these small people formed an informal parade as they made their daily trek down from the wooded mountainsides into the village. During a single Christmas season, literally thousands of flowering tillandsias make their way to market in this region alone.
One can imagine that in pre-Columbian, pre-christian times other occasions were found for the use of these spectacular plants by the local people. Massive collections such as these may have occurred for hundreds, perhaps even thousands of years.
Corpus Christi, Texas
Photos taken in the area of
San Cristobal de las Casas, Chiapas, Mexico, Christmas week.|
Plants with taller inflorescences are Tillandsia guatemalensis, the others are T. ponderosa.
ELTON M.C. LEME
Sao Pedro D’Aldeia is a district of the state of Rio de Janeiro, situated around the Araruama Lake — a high salinity natural reservoir. At an elevation 316 m high located in this region, 14,000 m from the Atlantic coast, a new species of Bromeliaceae endemic for the region was found in 1979. It is Vriesea eltoniana Pereira & Ivo.
The plant was described by the eminent brazilian botanist Dr. Edmundo Pereira and No Penna. The complete description can be found in Bradea, V. III, no. 27, December, 1981. The holotype is under the number HB 71.210 in the Herbarium Bradeanum.
PLANT: epiphyte, flowering up to 55 cm high. LEAVES: about 15 ligulate, forming an infundibuliform water reservoir at the base. LEAF SHEATHS: oblong-ovate, 6 cm long, 3-4 cm wide, with gray and slightly dark purple very short scales on both sides. LEAF BLADES: linear, 25 cm long and 3 cm wide, purple, on the upper side, underneath green, minutely scaled on both sides, tip acute and apiculate. SCAPE: erect, dark purple, 37 cm long, 5 mm in diameter, internodes 25 mm long, longer than the leaves; SCAPE BRACTS: oblong, 30 mm long, dark purple on both sides with inconspicuous scales, rounded and mucronate at the apex, longer than the internodes. INFLORESCENCE: simple, pinnate, flat, 10-20 cm long, 5 cm wide, rhachis slightly geniculate, dark purple, internodes 5 mm long, glabrous and bright; FLORAL BRACTS: narrowly ovate, 3 cm long, half purple below, the remainder yellow, strongly carinate and incurvate toward the apex, external face glabrous, with inconspicuous scales on the inside. FLOWERS: 55 mm long, not secund, divergent at anthesis, showing the rhachis; PEDICELS: purplish, 5 mm long, 5 mm in thickness; SEPALS: oblong-lanceolate, 35 mm long, 10 mm wide, externally glabrous, with inconspicuous scales inside, obtusely carinate, yellowish, green at the apex, obtuse, longer than the bracts; PETALS: linear, 45 mm long, 10 mm wide, yellow, green apex, emarginate, with 2 ligules at the base, ovate, entire, 3 mm long; STAMENS: exserted; filaments cylindrical; anthers linear, 6 mm long, sagitate at the base, obtuse at the apex; style by far extending beyond the anthers; OVARY: with pyramidal shape, 5 mm long; placenta firmly attached from the base to near the apex; full of apiculate ovules.
Vriesea eltoniana is close related to Vriesea laxa Mez but it differs from it mainly by the curved and strongly carinated floral bracts.
The habitat of V. eltoniana is composed of ligneous vegetation at an altitude of 300 m with trees 5 m to 10 m tall and 10 cm to 30 cm thick. This very interesting species is typically an epiphyte of shady locations and never grows above a 6 m high level. Its flowering period starts in March and finishes in late July.
The pluviometric index of the region is 816.6 mm/year. The average relative humidity of the air is 83.4% and the mean temperature for the year is around 23 °C.
Unfortunately the very small population of this species is vulnerable to damage from the inroads made by what passes for civilization. No effective protective measures are being taken so the habitat of V. eltoniana has been gradually destroyed by the negative influences of human action.
Rio de Janeiro, Brasil
HARRY E. LUTHERUndoubtedly one of the most spectacular (and most manageable) members of the genus Bromelia is B. scarlatina (hortus ex Herinco) E. Morr. This species was first described from cultivation as Distiacanthus scarlatinum by F. Herinco in the Journal L’Horticulteur Francais in 1869; twelve years later Edouard Morren transferred it to the proper genus, Bromelia. Bromelia scarlatina apparently soon disappeared from European horticulture and until very recently was known only from the type collection which unfortunately was of questionable origin. In 1977, Dr. Timothy Plowman introduced to cultivation at the Marie Selby Botanical Gardens living plants of this showy and interesting species. For the record, it can now be stated that Bromelia scarlatina is native to Amazonian Peru.
Following is a brief description based upon plants cultivated at The Marie Selby Botanical Gardens.
Bromelia scarlatina (hortus ex Herinco) E. Morr., Belg. Hortic. 31:164, 1881.
Leaves rosulate, ca 25 in number, distinctly petiolate; sheaths small, triangular; petioles to 30 cm long, serrate; blades broadly lanceolate, to 45 cm long, 10 cm wide, densely serrate, olive green, abaxially covered with grey scales, the inner leaf blades bright red when flowering; inflorescence low in the rosette, dense, bipinnate; primary bracts broadly lanceolate to ovate with an attenuate apex, serrate, bright red; floral bracts much shorter than the flowers, ca 20-25 mm long, pale green; pedicels short, sepals linear, free, 12-15 mm long, carinate, pale green, covered with brown, woolly scales; petals cucullate, obtuse to 25 mm long, dark blue margined white; stamens and style included.
Material examined: PERU: Loreto: Rio Ampiyacu, vic Pebas, May 1977, Plowman et al 7138 (sterile voucher at GH, USM, n.v., cult. at SEL).
Bromelia scarlatina appears to be quite easily cultivated if given plenty of warmth and moisture along with bright diffuse light. The root system is quite vigorous, so underpotting should be avoided. Plants at Selby Botanical Gardens are grown in either 8-inch plastic pots or planted directly in the ground in our display greenhouse. Offsets are produced on very short stolons and if removed as soon as they reach one-third the size of the parent plant, a half dozen or so can be expected.
Bromeliad Identification Center, Marie Selby Botanical Gardens, Sarasota Florida
In the course of our Ecuadorian bromeliad collecting trips, we found a very interesting landscape covered with enormous rock blocks on the way from Santa Isahl to Passaje in Southern Ecuador on Pachamama Pass at an altitude of 1600-1650 m. The name Pachamama means "rocks of the mother." The rocks were covered with many different xerophytic bromeliads: Tillandsia tectorum in particular was plentifully present. We have seen there T. mina, a large form of T. disticha, Pitcairnia pungens, a rose flowering species of Haageocereus, a cactus, and some new, remarkable vrieseas. The first of these is described as Vriesea andreettae Rauh, named after Father Angel Andreetta of Cuenca, Ecuador, who helped me enormously in my 1980 trip to Ecuador.
|Close-up view of Vriesea andreettae|
PLANT: forming dense clusters because of having short stolons, flowering up to 40 cm high. Rosette leaves numerous, forming dense rosette slightly inflated at the base, 20-30 cm high and 30 cm in diameter. SHEATHS: conspicuous, broad-ovate, up to 4.5 cm long and 3.5 cm wide, dark castaneous brown on both sides; blades narrow triangular, long attenuate, erect, silver-gray lepidote on both sides; above partly carmine red. SCAPE: erect, red, thin, as long as the leaves. SCAPE BRACTS: densely imbricate, longer than the internodes, enfolding the scape, without blade, only acute up to 5 cm long, dark wine red, gray lepidote, the upper ones transforming gradually into the floral bracts. INFLORESCENCE: simple, forming a complanate spike, 10-15 cm long, 1 cm wide. Rhachis flattened, inconspicuously excavate, red to green, glabrous, completely covered by the floral bracts; these are erect (only their dried tips are recurved), up to 3.5 cm long, glabrous, laxly lepidote, ecarinate (the upper ones inconspicuous carinate), carmine red, even numbers (strongly nerved when dried), much longer than the sepals; SEPALS: membranaceous, lanceolate-ovate, up to 2 cm long, reddish in the upper part, greenish at the base, free, the parterion ones carinate. PETALS: narrow ligulate, up to 4 cm long, deep blackish-blue, their tips only spreading, with 2 ligules at the base, stamens deeply included; the green style with the stigmas slightly exserted.
DISTRIBUTION: km 52 and km 104 on the road Cuenca-Passaje; 1600 m on rocks.
HOLOTYPE: Rauh Nr. 38 140 (June, 1975).
We re-collected this nice tillandsia-like species again in July, 1980 (Rauh Nr. 52 972). It grows with 2 other new species of Vriesea which will be described later.
According to Lyman Smith’s key, Flora Neotropica, "Tillandsioideae", 1972, Subkey II, Vriesea andreettae is related to V. cereicola (Mez) L.B. Smith, which also sometimes has simple inflorescences, but these are pendulous and the stamens are long exserted; furthermore, V. cereicola is known only from central and northern Peru.
1 The latin diagnosis appears
in "Bromelienstudien XI," in Tropische and Subtropische Pflanzenwelt, Akad.
d. Wiss. u. d. Lit. Mainz, 1982.
University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
BEULAH KIRKThis has indeed been an exciting year for me as President of the Bromeliad Society of South Africa. I had the opportunity of visiting the United States of America where I spent 2 wonderful months, during which time I had the privilege of meeting many kind and helpful people all of whom helped to make this the most wonderful experience of my life.
The main reason for the trip was to attend the World Bromeliad Conference in Corpus Christi, Texas, but as can well be imagined, a journey of such great distance had to include far more than that to make it worthwhile. Naturally, the most prolific bromeliad areas were my prime interest, but I also wanted to see much of the country while I had the chance. I was lucky enough to have found a colleague, Mrs. Mabel Martin, who shared my interests, and together we embarked on this grand tour. Now that we are safely back home, I can declare in all sincerity, that our trip was a rousing success.
In Los Angeles, California, we met Elmer Lorenz, a past President of the Bromeliad Society, Inc., a founder member and the former Corresponding Secretary. Mr. Lorenz introduced us to the former BSI President, Mr. Tim Lorman, at the Los Angeles County Arboretum in Arcadia, California, where he is the curator, and naturally a tour around the gardens followed and provided a very interesting experience. As can be expected, Mr. Lorenz has a considerable collection of bromeliads displayed in an area adjacent to his home, where they enjoy excellent growing conditions, evident by their robust and colorful growth. Mr. Lorenz, showed us many mementoes of the early days of the Society, including a table cloth which all the founder members signed. Later these signatures were embroidered so that they would remain more permanent for the benefit of future members and in order to honor those whose venture then, resulted in the Society as we know it today. We will long remember Mr. and Mrs. Lorenz for their hospitality and friendliness to both my colleague and myself.
Hawaii ... beautiful Hawaii... how we loved that paradise island, and how grateful we were to the people who helped us to see so many glorious bromeliads. Many of the members of the BSI are familiar with the garden of Goodale Moir. I had always wished to be able to see his collection for myself, so it was a great occasion when Bea and Wilbur Olson arranged to take us there. Mr. Moir is confined to a wheelchair, but his lively conversation and enthusiasm for bromeliads and other plants made us forget his disability as we picked his brains for information which he was happy to give. Mrs. Moir, a very sweet and charming lady, allowed us to ramble around the garden that was filled with delights in every nook and cranny.
Bea and Wilbur, who are very involved with the Fern Society, have an impressive collection of bromeliads as well as ferns, begonias and cordylines, etc., beautifully displayed in their enclosed garden. Wilbur is also the author of The Fern Dictionary, and I am the proud owner of an autographed copy of this book. They introduced us to Hiroshi Tagama and we had the privilege of wandering around his intriguing and beautiful home and garden, where we saw many of his magnificent paintings and his collection of rare birds. We also saw exotic tropical plants that seemed to grow bigger and better for him than I have ever seen them. His garden held delights and wonders at every turn with bromeliads, cordylines, heliconias, dieffenbachias and marantas of every color and hue, and many other marvelous plants too numerous to mention.
In San Diego, California, our host was Mr. Ray Sodomka, another member of the Fern Society and the author of articles on ferns. He too had an interesting collection of plants including many lovely bromeliads. We attended a bromeliad show in Balboa Park while in San Diego where magnificent plants were displayed for judging, and I believe Mr. Lorenz was one of the judges. Mr. Sodomka took us to Vista, California, where we saw the huge growing sheds of Kent’s Bromeliad Nursery. Mr. Jeffrey Kent showed us around and stoically put up with the ranting and raving of two people completely overcome at being confronted by so many bromeliads — literally millions of them! It was more than we could take in. We have some large bromeliad nurseries in South Africa, but nothing like that!
The Conference in Corpus Christi not only gave us the opportunity to attend informative and interesting seminars, but the chance to see some magnificent specimens and to visit many of the beautiful local collections which left us gasping at the beauty of them all. It also put us in contact with wonderful people, such as Mrs. Racine Foster, who offered to have us as guests at Bromel-la after the Conference an invitation we were unable to accept, which nearly broke our hearts. We also met Mrs. Connie Johnson, a Director of the Bromeliad Society of South Florida, whom we contacted once we reached Miami, Florida, and she kindly showed us all the sights in that region, including the beautiful Fairchild Gardens. We visited the nursery of Linda Evans, a young woman who with Connie Johnson, cares for the bromeliads in the exotic plant house at the Fairchild Gardens. Linda’s nursery is full of magnificent specimens all in excellent condition and including many rare and exciting species and hybrids which I longed to be able to take back to South Africa with me.
Now we are back home, but the memory of that exciting trip to the U.S. will long remain to fill our quiet moments with pleasure, as we remember all the beautiful bromeliads we saw. Most of all, we will remember the wonderful people who, more than anything else, made this a trip of a lifetime.
Durban, Republic of South Africa
JERRY RAACKWhat’s that, your bromeliad is growing up looking like a soda straw? It is probably the victim of what is commonly known as "quilling".
Quilling is the cementing of the leaves together causing the plant to be very tubular in shape. In generally is caused by lack of good moisture while the plant is in an active growing period.
I have found through my years of growing that certain genera are more susceptible to quilling than others. These genera are Vriesea and Guzmania. Rarely do aechmeas quill, although I have had Aechmea racinae var. tubiformis and Aechmea Foster’s Favorite quill. Within the genus Vriesea, certain hybrids and species are notoriously consistent in quilling. Among these are V. × morreniana, V. ensiformis, and unfortunately, Vriesea Viminalis Rex × V. hieroglyphica, which is a superb hybrid with nicely banded foliage and a fantastic, long lasting, branched, blood red inflorescence with, of course, yellow flowers. Within the genus Guzmania, the most likely to quill are G. Feurn, G. Fantasia, and occasionally G. Exodus. In addition other species of Guzmania and Vriesea will quill if grown very dry.
Besides dry conditions, some plants, both species and hybrids, are more susceptible because the leaves secrete a very sugary, sticky substance which, if not washed off regularly and thoroughly, causes the leaves to cement together.
To prevent quilling then, one must maintain high humidity, or, quite regularly flush the plant with water to thoroughly wash it off. There is no better way to do this than in a long, hard summer rain, but that is not possible in the winter in the northern states. Therefore taking a plant to the shower with you may sound silly, but an equivalent bathing procedure is very beneficial. Bathing a bromeliad? Maybe it sounds crazy but it works not only to prevent quilling, but cures it. If you have a plant which has already quilled, take a mild liquid detergent or soap and put several drops into the tight center and fill with water to overflowing. Let this mixture remain for a half hour, then add more water to overflowing. This procedure should produce lots of suds. The soapy water will dissolve the hardened glue substance, and then with the gentle use of a flat but blunt object, such as a plant marker, the leaves may be loosened from the outer-most to the inner-most. Make sure after loosening the leaves that all traces of soap are flushed off the leaves with lots of water. This procedure leaves the plant clean and free to continue to grow by absorption of nutrients through, not only the roots, but the leaves as well.
If you have quilling problems, or encounter them in the future, try my prevention and cure. It works!
|Photo by E. Besse|
This most unusual member of the genus Bromelia, recently introduced into cultivation at the Marie Selby Botanical Garden, is from Amazonian Peru. A specimen of this species was one of the plants sold at auction at the World Bromeliad Conference, Corpus Christi, Texas, to benefit the Marie Selby Botanical Garden. see page 265.