• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


About Aurélien

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

170 profile views
  1. Hi Robert, Christenhusz just produces the new combinations to put all Aglaomorpha under Drynaria. Thus, many of them has old combinations under the genus Drynaria. For example, the A. heraclea was described as Polypodium heracleum by Kunze in 1848. Thus, T. Moore assesed it as Drynaria heraclea in 1862. The name Aglaomorpha heraclea was only put by Copeland in 1929! See have all names and historic. Is it clearer? The best, Aurélien
  2. Hi all, Recent studies in phylogeny had proved genus Drynaria to be paraphyletic. All drynarioid humus-collecting ferns should be now regarded as Drynaria. This include the 9 species of Aglaomorpha and the 2 species of Christiopteris. The whole publication (only one page of recombinations!) here: It's not really perturbating to me, as these ferns had the same habit and show many similarities. The best, Aurélien
  3. Hello All, The first film of "Lost worlds", association who organize the 2014 expedition, is just online: At 2:26 you can see a pretty nice Hydnophytum formicarum (as well asthe team leader and a stupid hanged botanist ) Enjoy! Aurélien
  4. Hi Frank, Thanks for this paper! So, Hydnophytum kajewskii and H. guppyanum are now transfered into Squamellaria. Why not, it seems that Hydnophytum is a polyphyletic genus... Nice to see that people from the forum as Derrick and Andreas are included in this work! The best, Aurélien
  5. Hi Jeff, Of course. Thus, in botany, a single registered herbarium sheet is called a nomen nudum and have absolutely no value. If it doesn't have publication, there's no valid name for the plant. And IPNI is a list of validely named species... If H. extendifolium doesn't appear, that's because it's not rely to any publication. Yes, but that's not the question here. We don't search for a currently accepted name, taht's only an opinion: some botanist could recognize some species and other botanist don't... That's an eternal debate. Here, IPNI quote only valid names. Not accepted names! The best, Aurélien
  6. Hi Jeff, If you search for Hydnophytum "extendifolium", you will soon remark that it's also a nomen nudum... It had never been published: Here, IPNI: And also, WCSP:;jsessionid=E2CC415BFB403B4B8D87366FB1085625 Thus, if WCSP haven't yet time to treat H. puffii, you'll see it in IPNI database. All is done: there's perhaps 3 names for the same plant, but 2 of them are only wind. H. perangustum nor H. extendifolium exist, you can forget them. The best, Aurélien
  7. Hi all, Good news that something move! Another plant correctly named, I love it. I'm personnally happy that this species are published by malesian people. I not always feel easy when american or european scientists publish all the diversity in the other countries. Actually, H. perangustum is still a nomen nudum, as it had never been officially published... We only know this name by word of mouth. I think it could be an humility lesson for Jebb and Huxley... They never want to share their work, announced in 2009. All the best, Aurélien
  8. Hi, Welcome aboard! In my experience, the substrate is only a support for these epiphytic plants. You should adapt the soil with your conditions: ensure good drainage if your conditions are wet, and a good retention of water if your conditions are dry. Many substrates could be used ; fibrous peat, pine bark, coconut chips, live sphagnum, perlite, pumice... I'm not completely agree with Frank: we have really wet and shady greenhouses, with few air movement, and if the substrate is wet too long, the plants rot quickly. We need to give them a few quantity of water and let the soil dry out quickly. I think the best is high humidity, but with a very good ventilation! And as much sun as you can! And also a high nitrogen fertiliser could help. All the best, Aurélien
  9. Hi Robert, This plant seems to be the highly polymorphic D. bengalensis in my opinion... You'll certainly see more clear when this plant bloom. All the best, Aurélien
  10. Thanks for this information, Frank. Moreover, some other lectures will include ant-plant mutualism: Walter Federle, Zoology, University of Cambridge, United Kingdom Biomechanics of ant/plant mutualisms Guillaume Chomicki (lab of Susanne Renner), Munich University, Germany Gain and loss of specialization in various symbioses between Philidris and Rubiaceae on Fiji Elizabeth Pringle, currently on a research professorship in Jena, Germany From micro to macro, the trophic regulation of ant-plant/hemipteran mutualisms Megan Frederickson, University of Toronto, Canada Behavioral genetics of an ant/plant mutualism Jérôme Orivel, CNRS, Kourou, French Guiana Trade-offs in mutualistic investments in a tripartite symbiosis Phil Ward, University of California, Davis, USA The acacia-ants revisited: phylogeny and biogeography of an iconic ant/plant mutualism The lecture from the colleague of Kourou seems to be pretty interesting, as many intersting ant-plants live in Frenc Guyana.
  11. Hi Septriyanto, Our knowledge is mostly based on the 1993's revision of the genus by Huxley and Jebb: This paper recognize 26 species. You can also see this database (Kew Gardens, UK):;jsessionid=3FC5C49FA734D01A57FCE1AC5E6C5655 Names in bold indicate accepted names, plain list indicates non accepted names. This database is really serious, I use it for all species included in it. All Rubiaceae (i.e. Hydnophytum and Myrmecodia) are, but for example, Apocynaceae (Dischidia, Hoya) not. The best, Aurélien
  12. Hi Derrick, Thanks for your help and confirmation! This one is slightly different, with narrow and acute leaves, but I agree: the crassulacean leaves and smooth tuber are typical. The best, Aurélien
  13. Hello Septriyanto, Interesting informations. I hope however that these discoveries will not impact too much wild populations in the future... Best wishes, Aurélien