miremonster

Hello snowy,
according to informations from literature and some plants that I cultivate or I've seen, E. uruguayensis comprises lots of different forms - with long or short, narrow or broad, dark or light green leaves, brownish or reddish tint... Surely these botanists are correct who understand E. horemanii as a synonym of E. uruguayensis (Haynes & Holm-Nielsen 1994), and E. horemanii and this E. uruguayensis listed by sellers are only 2 forms among many others.
But there remains a basal problem: When we avoid such synonyms, it may be right in terms of botany, but then we cannot easily label different cultivated forms of the same species.

snowy

miremonster thanks for your reply.

In that case would it not be more correct to refer to it as E. uryguayensis var. horemanii, much like C. crispatula var. balansae?

However I do understand that for the sake of practicality horemanii has far greater recognition amongst hobbyists and dealers.

I am not trying to nitpick, rather just curious as I am starting to see plants that previously would have been called a 'green horemanii' now labeled as E. uryguayensis and I wonder if they are 'real' uryguayensis or simply a hybrid that resembles the 'original'.

miremonster

<<<In that case would it not be more correct to refer to it as E. uryguayensis var. horemanii, much like C. crispatula var. balansae?<<<
This could be a solution. But it would depend on an existence of more or less distinct populations in the nature showing the characters of E. horemanii. We only can wait what taxonomists will find out, the knowledge about natural populations of Echinodorus-species is still insufficient. An alternative could be an informal name, e.g. E. uruguayensis "horemanii green", a cultivar name, or a designation referring to the geographical origin.
Sadly, in many cases the origins of cultivated Echinodorus (except for many cultivars) are unknown (surely the commercial collectors and exporters have no interest to blab it) , so it is difficult to detect if the plants are selections or hybrids from culture or naturals (or natural hybrids).

Cavan Allen

Incorrect: Fissiden
Correct: Fissidens

Reason: The plural of shrimp doesn't have an S at the end, but this does.

miremonster

A similar case like Fissidens:

Incorrect: Anubia
Correct: Anubias (it is a singular form)

zQ.

How about the Moss ? Some time i heard people call them Moos.

miremonster

Hello zQ.,
"Moos" is German for moss, or, more precisely, for "bryophyte". The 3 main groups of bryophytes are called in German:
"Laubmoose" ("leafy mosses") = mosses
"Lebermoose" = liverworts
"Hornmoose" = hornworts

Tausendblatt

Sorry to post in a really old thread, but this really grinds my gears:

Incorrect: Elodea crispa
Correct: Lagarosiphon major

Lagarosiphon is the correct genus.

Incorrect: Elodea densa, Egeria desna, Anacharis densa
Correct: Egeria densa

Anacharis is an incorrect and obsolete GENUS name! Elodea is an entirely different genus. Desna is a misspelled name.

It really grinds my gears when I speak of the true Elodea genus, but people think I am talking about Egeria densa.

I don't know what is the correct name for sago pondweed, I don't know if it is potamogeton or that stuckenia genus. Stuckenia is often cited as having a single species, and sometimes it has 3 or 4 included. Sadly, sago pondweed is not common in the hobby...