eclayne said:Hope you're coffee'd up Sway. I wouldn't call those links I posted definitive at all and these things change all the time. It would be nice to hear other views because there is clearly a lot of confusion about them. I see @LariAnn has done work with A. 'Frydek'.

If Frydek is a hybrid, I've never read or heard anything about the parentage or the breeder. With a plant like that, ypu'd think the breeder would like to get credit for producing it. Besides that, I have a hybrid of Frydek and bullata - the original cross was done by Brian Williams years ago. I used that hybrid to produce a cross involving my Imperial Giant as one parent and the "Frydek-bullata" as the other parent. The look of the seedlings indicated to me that Frydek is not likely to be a hybrid of A. micholitziana as I did not see hybrid segregation indicating a throwback to the putative pure A. micholitziana or indications of the identity of another unknown parent. So this is my view - Frydek is a sport or cultivar of A. micholitziana, not a hybrid. IMHO, to make a hybrid that looks like Frydek would take years of work - such extensive work could not be kept hidden from plant fanciers/inquisitive members of the IAS as some of the "culls" from the cross would be valuable in their own right as collectors items!

LariAnn

Thanks for sharing your observations with us LariAnn. Reading your various posts and articles regarding your crosses and the resulting seedlings is like reading a good mystery novel. One chapter at a time and years in the making. Among others I've read Alocasia zebrina and Two Allies-A Case Study several times. Thanks for sharing these observations.

I've got to go on and pony up the cash to join the IAS...it's cheap...ill pay more for one plant( rarely even do tho) than the cost of a year membership... But then I wouldn't have than plant...

Now that we have LariAnn's attention, I'll just hijack Dave's thread

So my understanding is that a non frydek micholitziana would have less white in the leaf veins, as well as a more narrow and scalloped leaf, there's very little info about all the afor mentioned plants online, atleast info I can find.
Are there other dramatic differences? Such as petiole coloration or size?

My main interest, other than obtaining one of course, is that it's stated in numerous sources that alocasia sarian is a hybrid of A. micholitziana and A. Zebrine... (I'm confused about A. Zebrine too...it seems to be a monicer reserved for the reticulata form of A. Zebrina😵 see told you I'm confused)...

I have a hard time understanding how parents such as those yields offspring like sarian, it swiftly grows to monstrous proportions, under a range of conditions,
Admittedly there does seem to be traits of both these parents, but hybrid vigor hardly explains how a plant more than twice the size of the larger parent!
I've never found info stating whether the A. Micholitziana used was frydek, and I'm confused with exactly what A. Zebrine is...maybe my lack of understanding sarian stems from not understand its parents...

To go along with this, I've never seen anyone credited for the cross yielding Sarian, in my opinion, an alocasia thats beauty is tough to match, big, boldly marked, and easy to grow!
I would sure want credit if I made the cross!

If anyone wants to clear ANY of this up for me... That would be just stellar!

May I just say . . . Holy cow!

I'm obviously an amateur among professionals here, but . . . if it looks pretty and grows easily, I don't care who its parents are.

LariAnn said:If Frydek is a hybrid, I've never read or heard anything about the parentage or the breeder. With a plant like that, ypu'd think the breeder would like to get credit for producing it. Besides that, I have a hybrid of Frydek and bullata - the original cross was done by Brian Williams years ago. I used that hybrid to produce a cross involving my Imperial Giant as one parent and the "Frydek-bullata" as the other parent. The look of the seedlings indicated to me that Frydek is not likely to be a hybrid of A. micholitziana as I did not see hybrid segregation indicating a throwback to the putative pure A. micholitziana or indications of the identity of another unknown parent. So this is my view - Frydek is a sport or cultivar of A. micholitziana, not a hybrid. IMHO, to make a hybrid that looks like Frydek would take years of work - such extensive work could not be kept hidden from plant fanciers/inquisitive members of the IAS as some of the "culls" from the cross would be valuable in their own right as collectors items!

LariAnn

Thanks for the info. LariAnn.

dyzzypyxxy said:May I just say . . . Holy cow!

I'm obviously an amateur among professionals here, but . . . if it looks pretty and grows easily, I don't care who its parents are.

Oh I promise, I'm still well within the amateur catagory too!

Swayback,
The typical A. micholitziana has smaller, narrower leaves, scalloped as you indicated, and has mottled to reddish petioles, at least in the specimens I have seen. The green on the leaves was not as dark as the green on Frydek, but that could be due to culture and/or the fact that Frydek does not have any pigmentation on the petioles or main veins. There are other species of Alocasia with both green and mottled or colored forms, such as A. brisbanensis and A. macrorrhizos, so lack of color (other than green) would not preclude Frydek from being a sport or variety of A. micholitziana.

As for A. sarian, I see it as highly unlikely to be a cross involving A. micholitziana and A. zebrina, not impossible but I'd be really surprised if it were the case. I've crossed A. sarian with A. odora and did not get any indication in the progeny of A. zebrina in the parentage. The progeny were exactly what I would expect from crossing two species, not from crossing a species and a hybrid together, or two hybrids together. As for A. zebrina, i've crossed it with Borneo Giant and that is about the only way I've been able to get a colossal plant that looks and feels much like A. zebrina, so crossing two smaller plants yielding a giant plant makes little sense to me unless one of the plants has the genetic constitution to be very large, but in recessive genes. This kind of thing could show up in progeny of a selfing, and no doubt would be really notable to the breeder.

I agree wholeheartedly that any breeder that would produce a plant like A. sarian would be certain to want credit for it. A. sarian was described in David Burnett's IAS monograph on Alocasias quite a few years ago, before it was even on the market, and so i suspect it was a wild-collected plant that was spectacular enough to get into the market on its own merits, without "improvement". Believe it or not, i find A. sarian to be difficult to keep alive, although I've seen at least one extremely impressive, large specimen of the plant growing in the yard of a person who is not an Alocasia expert, so go figure!

Awesome answer, satisfying to know my train of thought was fairly in sync with a REAL professional!

I guess the mystery as well as diversity likely leads to my obsession with them

I've had great luck with sarian so far, I should point out that this is my first year with it, but it's out grown several of my alocasias, not the real rank ones like odora, portora, yucatan princess or even porteii, but it's growing well considering it was a plug in April...I bought and planted it with two 8" tall leaves in too much shade, then moved it in June to move sun as it was requesting...



All this still begs the question: where did sarian "come from"...
Same for frydek, I would think even if not hybrids people would still like credit for them...
It would have been relatively easy to apply for patents on both, tho it may not have been worth it...

I also wonder where I might find A. Micholitziana, non frydek, especially if they have colored pets.!

About the non-Frydek A. micholitziana, I do not have one, and suspect that it may be rare even in collections due to difficulty in growing it. The few I have seen over the years did not look very healthy, not like a well-grown Frydek. I would place them in the group I call the "jewels", beautiful but a real challenge to grow properly.

LariAnn

I guess ill give up before I start, finicky plants just don't make too long round here, unless I can dial in their culture quick!

I just found this...
A blog by Zac B. Sarian...
Claiming that Sarian is named after him...stands to reason...
I was just looking at pics of Sarian to show off and saw a really nice one so I clicked it...
Low and behold this gentlemen is standing with one, but... It's not the same plant!

Differs from my Sarian in that it appears to have solid green petioles, lobed leaves, and much more distinct white midrib and veins... But it's clearly very similar!
Equally stunning too!

Do you have a link?

Here's the link; scroll down the page to see the plant. IMHO, this plant is quite remarkable. Seeing it almost scared me because it looks a lot like something I imagined many years ago before anyone knew about A. sarian. It does not look like the same Sarian as seen in David Burnett's monograph, except for the white veins. The leaf lobing on this one is really startling - it is what I would expect to get from crossing A. sarian with A. portei, then backcrossing with A. sarian again. I'd expect a whole raft of seedling variations, some of which might look like the commercial A. sarian. According to the blog, the plant is native to the Philippines. Click on the picture and you'll get a much larger high resolution version which is even more stunning than the little picture on the blog.

http://www.agrizaccess.com/201...

LariAnn

Nice find Sway!! http://www.agrizaccess.com/201... ??

David Burnett, The Cultivated Alocasia - Sold Out.

LariAnn said:It does not look like the same Sarian as seen in David Burnett's monograph, except for the white veins.

Does the one in David's monograph look like the one currently available? How is your work with A. Sarian progressing LariAnn?

LariAnn said:Here's the link; scroll down the page to see the plant. IMHO, this plant is quite remarkable. Seeing it almost scared me because it looks a lot like something I imagined many years ago before anyone knew about A. sarian. It does not look like the same Sarian as seen in David Burnett's monograph, except for the white veins. The leaf lobing on this one is really startling - it is what I would expect to get from crossing A. sarian with A. portei, then backcrossing with A. sarian again. I'd expect a whole raft of seedling variations, some of which might look like the commercial A. sarian. According to the blog, the plant is native to the Philippines. Click on the picture and you'll get a much larger high resolution version which is even more stunning than the little picture on the blog.

http://www.agrizaccess.com/201...

LariAnn

Thanks LariAnn.

I'm such a goober... I forgot to add the link...

I was pretty amazed...at all the info...and the plant...

Never know what google will find...

Evan,
The one in David Burnett's monograph looks much like the one on the market - much more so than that stunner on the blog! I haven't done any more work with A. sarian since I was able to get my hands on pollen of A. vangigoh, which is like A. sarian on steroids - aroid steroids! The main cross I did was A. odora x A. sarian and that worked fine but I have yet to get an F2 from that cross. Same with A. odora and A. vangigoh. I heard that someone did A. macrorrhizos "Borneo Giant" x A. sarian, but I went instead with Borneo Giant x A. vangigoh, which yielded my Imperial Giant.

LariAnn

Aroid steroids Here we thought you were such a serious scientist/plant geek, LariAnn!

When do we get to see a picture of an Imperial Giant?