I saw this pretty plant growing in a container outside a building near where I work and at first thought it was a coleus, but no one on the coleus forum recognizes it and I think the leaves are a little thicker than most coleus. I'm thinking many a pletranthus. Height in the container is about 15". Upright with no vining. Leaves are maybe 2.5" in length. I will try to watch it and get a photo of the whole plant and the bloom if it does flower later. It is planted with some coleus and it's growth habit is much like a coleus.

Someone on the coleus suggested salvia 'Dancing Flame'. for this plant and I think they may be correct. No sign of any blooms on it right down, but I will watch for some.

It looks like a Coleus cultivar, and there are many! A salvia would have a square stem, probably more woody, and I've never seen a salvia even close to that!

Try rooting it in water. Very few plants will actually root it water (mint doesn't count), but Coleus does willingly. Good luck!

Looks like a coleus to me too, larger photos may help.
And by the way, coleus have been reclassified as Plectranthus scutellarioides, so you got the Plectranthus part right.

I have been looking at Coleus all day today and I saw something that looks just like that.

it looks a bit like Coleus Wizard Pineapple.


Pineapple Coleus
http://www.parkswholesaleplant...

It is very interesting.

Salvia or Plectranthus should have a telling odor. Coleus should be making flowers by now. Maybe a cultivar of Perilla too new to have a ton of pics out there? (All 3 have square stems.)

Still curious with you!

"coleus have been reclassified as Plectranthus scutellarioides" Oops, that's Solenostemon scutellarioides.

Sorry but according to ITIS, the Integrated Taxonomic Information System, Solenostemon scutellarioides is not accepted: http://www.itis.gov/servlet/Si...
It's now Plectranthus scutellarioides, coleus scutellarioides is a synonym:
http://www.itis.gov/servlet/Si...

Excuse me, and thanks for the link. I guess it's been more than a year since I checked the botanical name of this plant although your note did inspire me to check again now. There is a discrepancy between the source linked above and many others, including USDA plants database and RHS, sources that should be considered reliable. It's likely that a recent change (which this seems to be) hasn't trickled-down into these other databases, although a year is forever in terms of maintaining an accurate info database. I am not familiar with the linked source but it seems to be a US, non-international entity, and the website says, "TIS does not intend to serve as a forum for cutting-edge taxonomic classifications." So I'm not sure where this change, according to them, comes from, or why it's not indicated in/by other sources, or which source is supposed to supply info, and which just absorb the trickle of info to supply to us, just the lowly millions of people actually trying to use these constantly changing names... to which the latest genetic info could have been appended in addition to any other facts about the plant which aren't necessary to convey in a name.

According to another Plant Admin, "ITIS is less complete because it only covers species that occur in North America but it does seem to be more current than The Plant List or Kew so we tend to favor following ITIS for North American plants and follow The Plant List for the rest."
The Plant List ("a working list of all known plant species. Collaboration between the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew and Missouri Botanical Garden enabled the creation of The Plant List by combining multiple checklist data sets held by these institutions and other collaborators.")
also lists it with it's new name: http://www.theplantlist.org/tp...

You are absolutely right. Thanks for the info and link!

This renaming is frustrating, this unnecessary discussion being a prime example of why.

Curious if the planter at stilldew's work ever bloomed...?