Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old 05-04-2003, 04:32 PM
blair
 
Posts: n/a
Default plant that grows from a relative of the Yam family?

Hi:
I was at somebody's house once and they had a big sprawling plant with heart
shaped leaves. They said that they grew it by putting a relative of the yam
family into the ground and planting it. Apparently you could also plant a
yam and grow a different plant as well.

Does anyone know what this plant is?

Thanks,
Blair





  #2   Report Post  
Old 05-04-2003, 04:32 PM
Cereoid+10
 
Posts: n/a
Default plant that grows from a relative of the Yam family?

Dioscorea is a huge genus.

Could it be you are you speaking of a species of Ipomoea?

What did the flowers look like?


blair wrote in message
...
Hi:
I was at somebody's house once and they had a big sprawling plant with

heart
shaped leaves. They said that they grew it by putting a relative of the

yam
family into the ground and planting it. Apparently you could also plant a
yam and grow a different plant as well.

Does anyone know what this plant is?

Thanks,
Blair




  #3   Report Post  
Old 05-04-2003, 04:32 PM
Beverly Erlebacher
 
Posts: n/a
Default plant that grows from a relative of the Yam family?

In article ,
blair wrote:
I was at somebody's house once and they had a big sprawling plant with heart
shaped leaves. They said that they grew it by putting a relative of the yam
family into the ground and planting it. Apparently you could also plant a
yam and grow a different plant as well.

Does anyone know what this plant is?


In some areas, sweet potatoes are called yams, but they don't belong to
either the potato or the yam family - they are related to morning glories.

When I was a kid (in ancient times), you could just stick a sweet potato
(Ipomoea batatas) halfway into a glass of water and have a lush sprawling
plant as described in a few weeks. Nowadays, both sweet and real potatoes
are usually treated to prevent sprouting, but if you look carefully you may
find some that aren't, perhaps in a store that sells organically grown produce.

In the past few years I've been seeing ornamental cultivars of sweet potato
sold as hanging basket annuals, with lime-green, purple-black or variegated
leaves. If you live in an area where people grow sweet potatoes in their
gardens, you may be able to find 'sets' or young plants in the spring.

You can also get some really nice plants from other roots and tubers,
especially if you can find grocery stores catering to people from tropical
areas. One of my favorite is 'eddoes', which I'm pretty sure is a small
variety of taro (Colocasia esculenta). You can sometimes find ones that
are starting to sprout, and grow them in a pot half submerged in a bucket
of water. The leaves are very attractive, and after a summer on my patio
I actually had two or three times more eddoes than I planted. These things
must be fantastically productive in a suitable climate, considering how
well they did here in Toronto. There are ornamental varieties of taro and
related plants but just plain eddoes look great.

They are called eddoes in the West Indies, but you can also find them in
Chinese groceries. I don't know the name in Chinese, and when I ask, they
tell me 'Chinese potato'!

If you start to get into this sort of exotic produce gardening in pots, be
sure to try ginger, another nice looking plant that does well with surprisingly
little sunlight.

  #4   Report Post  
Old 05-04-2003, 04:32 PM
I Don't Like Spam
 
Posts: n/a
Default plant that grows from a relative of the Yam family?

In article ,
blair wrote:
I was at somebody's house once and they had a big sprawling plant with heart
shaped leaves. They said that they grew it by putting a relative of the yam
family into the ground and planting it. Apparently you could also plant a
yam and grow a different plant as well.

Does anyone know what this plant is?

When I was in college, a friend planted a sweet potato in a pot and
let it grow. Later she told her room-mate that it was a "heart-shaped
wandering jew". This was believed until an energetic pet knocked the
pot over, breaking it, revealing the true nature of the plant. As
mentioned earlier, sweet potato is in Convolvulaceae, with morning
glories.

I wouldn't have brought this up, except sitting on my window sill here
at work is a member of the yam family Dioscoreaceae, _Dioscorea
macrostachya_, (dormant right now) the leaves of which are very
similar to the heart shaped leaves of sweet potato. This grows from a
large corm that is quite interesting in appearance. In nature this
corm is hidden underground, but when sold as a houseplant, the organ
is kept above ground for show (some of the larger, older ones resemble
a tortoise shell, at least if you have an active imagination).

So, before we jump to conclusions about exactly what the plant is,
there ARE some members of the yam family kept as houseplants that fit
your description (although, in general, they are a bit pricey, and not
very common except perhaps through specialty succulent dealers).

Sweet potatoes as sold in the US, often called yams (oh the wonders of
misleading common names). Ask your friend if they could allow you to
take a look at the underground stem by brusing away a little soil. If
it looks like a sweet potato, it probably is. Otherwise, my Dioscorea
has a THIN, SINGLE, TOUGH twining vine that comes from the TOP of a
CORM-like structure. If I recall correctly, a sweet potato would
likely have SEVERAL sprouts coming from a VARIOUS POINTS along a
HORIZONTAL TUBER, and those sprouts would tend to be more FLESHY or
SUCCULENT, at least close to the tuber.

Hope this helps.
  #5   Report Post  
Old 05-04-2003, 04:32 PM
Cereoid+10
 
Posts: n/a
Default plant that grows from a relative of the Yam family?

Sorry Spammy Davis, Jr. but you have already jumped to wrong conclusions and
that does not help.

The rootstock of Dioscorea is a tuber not a corm. A corm is covered by a
tunic but a tuber is not.

Dioscorea is a huge genus and even includes a number of cold hardy species.

The "Sweet Potato" Ipomoea batatas is a "Morning Glory" with tuberous roots.


I Don't Like Spam wrote in message
...
In article ,
blair wrote:
I was at somebody's house once and they had a big sprawling plant with

heart
shaped leaves. They said that they grew it by putting a relative of the

yam
family into the ground and planting it. Apparently you could also plant a
yam and grow a different plant as well.

Does anyone know what this plant is?

When I was in college, a friend planted a sweet potato in a pot and
let it grow. Later she told her room-mate that it was a "heart-shaped
wandering jew". This was believed until an energetic pet knocked the
pot over, breaking it, revealing the true nature of the plant. As
mentioned earlier, sweet potato is in Convolvulaceae, with morning
glories.

I wouldn't have brought this up, except sitting on my window sill here
at work is a member of the yam family Dioscoreaceae, _Dioscorea
macrostachya_, (dormant right now) the leaves of which are very
similar to the heart shaped leaves of sweet potato. This grows from a
large corm that is quite interesting in appearance. In nature this
corm is hidden underground, but when sold as a houseplant, the organ
is kept above ground for show (some of the larger, older ones resemble
a tortoise shell, at least if you have an active imagination).

So, before we jump to conclusions about exactly what the plant is,
there ARE some members of the yam family kept as houseplants that fit
your description (although, in general, they are a bit pricey, and not
very common except perhaps through specialty succulent dealers).

Sweet potatoes as sold in the US, often called yams (oh the wonders of
misleading common names). Ask your friend if they could allow you to
take a look at the underground stem by brusing away a little soil. If
it looks like a sweet potato, it probably is. Otherwise, my Dioscorea
has a THIN, SINGLE, TOUGH twining vine that comes from the TOP of a
CORM-like structure. If I recall correctly, a sweet potato would
likely have SEVERAL sprouts coming from a VARIOUS POINTS along a
HORIZONTAL TUBER, and those sprouts would tend to be more FLESHY or
SUCCULENT, at least close to the tuber.

Hope this helps.





  #6   Report Post  
Old 05-04-2003, 04:32 PM
Monique Reed
 
Posts: n/a
Default plant that grows from a relative of the Yam family?

D. bulbifera does make aerial tubers. They look a lot like potatoes,
which has earned the plant the common name "Air Potato." It's
commonly cultivated as a curiosity. In some cultivars the tubers are
edible. You can see an image at:
http://botany.cs.tamu.edu/FLORA/dcs420/fa08/fa08071.jpg

M. Reed

David Hershey wrote:
Hortus Third also says D. bulbifera produces
aerial tubers,

  #7   Report Post  
Old 05-04-2003, 04:32 PM
Cereoid+10
 
Posts: n/a
Default plant that grows from a relative of the Yam family?

The term rootsock does not mean the same as true roots. Roostock refers to
the central body of perennial plants and can be rhizomes, tubers, bulbs,
etc.

Webster's (which is not a botanical reference anyway) is wrong. The
rootstock of Dioscorea is a tuber. Often it is fleshy but it can be woody
and caudiciform. None have tunicated corms.

You should look for yourself rather than rely on sources based on second or
third hand information.


David Hershey wrote in message
om...
A rootstock cannot be a tuber because a tuber is a modified stem.

A variety of terms are applied to storage structures of Dioscorea.
Katherine Esau in her Anatomy of Seed Plants text, Hortus Third,
Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary (under yam) and all the college
introductory botany texts I checked all say Dioscorea has a storage
root or tuberous root. Hortus Third also says D. bulbifera produces
aerial tubers, and some Dioscorea species have rhizomes. A few
websites even claim some Dioscorea species do have corms.

Distinctions between types of modified stems, such as stolons,
rhizomes, tubers and corms, are not always clear cut.

Reference


http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&i...orm&btnG=Googl
e+Search


David R. Hershey



"Cereoid+10" wrote in message

om...
Sorry Spammy Davis, Jr. but you have already jumped to wrong conclusions

and
that does not help.

The rootstock of Dioscorea is a tuber not a corm. A corm is covered by a
tunic but a tuber is not.

Dioscorea is a huge genus and even includes a number of cold hardy

species.

The "Sweet Potato" Ipomoea batatas is a "Morning Glory" with tuberous

roots.


I Don't Like Spam wrote in message
...
In article ,
blair wrote:
I was at somebody's house once and they had a big sprawling plant

with
heart
shaped leaves. They said that they grew it by putting a relative of

the
yam
family into the ground and planting it. Apparently you could also

plant a
yam and grow a different plant as well.

Does anyone know what this plant is?
When I was in college, a friend planted a sweet potato in a pot and
let it grow. Later she told her room-mate that it was a "heart-shaped
wandering jew". This was believed until an energetic pet knocked the
pot over, breaking it, revealing the true nature of the plant. As
mentioned earlier, sweet potato is in Convolvulaceae, with morning
glories.

I wouldn't have brought this up, except sitting on my window sill here
at work is a member of the yam family Dioscoreaceae, _Dioscorea
macrostachya_, (dormant right now) the leaves of which are very
similar to the heart shaped leaves of sweet potato. This grows from a
large corm that is quite interesting in appearance. In nature this
corm is hidden underground, but when sold as a houseplant, the organ
is kept above ground for show (some of the larger, older ones resemble
a tortoise shell, at least if you have an active imagination).

So, before we jump to conclusions about exactly what the plant is,
there ARE some members of the yam family kept as houseplants that fit
your description (although, in general, they are a bit pricey, and not
very common except perhaps through specialty succulent dealers).

Sweet potatoes as sold in the US, often called yams (oh the wonders of
misleading common names). Ask your friend if they could allow you to
take a look at the underground stem by brusing away a little soil. If
it looks like a sweet potato, it probably is. Otherwise, my Dioscorea
has a THIN, SINGLE, TOUGH twining vine that comes from the TOP of a
CORM-like structure. If I recall correctly, a sweet potato would
likely have SEVERAL sprouts coming from a VARIOUS POINTS along a
HORIZONTAL TUBER, and those sprouts would tend to be more FLESHY or
SUCCULENT, at least close to the tuber.

Hope this helps.



  #8   Report Post  
Old 05-04-2003, 04:32 PM
David Hershey
 
Posts: n/a
Default plant that grows from a relative of the Yam family?

Rootstock is one of several botanical terms that have multiple
definitions. You seem to be referring to the old gardening definition
of rootstock as a synonym for rhizome or underground stem. Using
rootstock as a term for a stem is obviously confusing and therefore
undesirable.

The more useful definition of rootstock is the root bearing part of a
grafted plant. However, even when applied to grafting, rootstock is
somewhat misleading. Less misleading terms are understock or stock. A
stock may consist solely of root tissue. However, a stock is usually
going to consist mostly of root tissue with a small amount of stem
tissue. The stock of a topgrafted fruit tree will contain considerable
stem tissue. A stock may include an underground stem but usually it
will not. About the only plant with tubers that is occasionally
grafted is potato. Tomato is grafted on potato as a novelty or for
research.

I mentioned several botanical sources, not just Websters Dictionary.
You mentioned no sources. Katherine Esau was a well respected plant
anatomist. The root chapter in her textbook, Anatomy of Seed Plants,
2nd ed. says Dioscorea has "storage roots." Maybe Esau, Hortus Third
and the half dozen college botany textbooks I consulted are wrong and
Dioscorea does have tubers and not storage roots as you contend. If
so, where is some published proof of that? I checked Simpson and
Ogorzally (1986) which says there is controversy whether Dioscorea
storage organs represent stem or root tissue.

Terms for modified stems are not uniformly defined and are often
confusing. There seems to be more diversity in underground stems than
can be accomodated by the handful of terms commonly used. Tuberous
root and tuber are particularly confusing terms. The term storage root
seems to be preferred over tuberous root in botany textbooks and is
certainly more accurate.

There are different definitions for tuber. Some authorities restrict
tuber to a swollen underground organ that develops from a rhizome or
stolon. By that definition, tuberous begonia and cyclamen do not
produce tubers although they are commonly called tubers. Cyclamen is
often referred to as a corm as well. Their storage organs develop
mainly from the hypocotyl and have a vertical orientation, not the
horizontal orientation of a "true" tuber. They are sometimes termed
tuberous stems instead (Hartmann and Kester 1983). However, that term
adds additional confusion. The aerial tubers of some Dioscorea species
are also not "true" tubers and are sometimes termed tubercles or
bulbils.

David R. Hershey


References

Hartmann, H.T. and Kester, D.E. 1983. Plant Propagation: Principles
and Practices. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Simpson, B.B. and Ogorzally, M.C. 1986. Economic Botany: Plants in Our
World. NY: McGraw-Hill.




"Cereoid+10" wrote in message ...
The term rootsock does not mean the same as true roots. Roostock refers to
the central body of perennial plants and can be rhizomes, tubers, bulbs,
etc.

Webster's (which is not a botanical reference anyway) is wrong. The
rootstock of Dioscorea is a tuber. Often it is fleshy but it can be woody
and caudiciform. None have tunicated corms.

You should look for yourself rather than rely on sources based on second or
third hand information.


David Hershey wrote in message
om...
A rootstock cannot be a tuber because a tuber is a modified stem.

A variety of terms are applied to storage structures of Dioscorea.
Katherine Esau in her Anatomy of Seed Plants text, Hortus Third,
Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary (under yam) and all the college
introductory botany texts I checked all say Dioscorea has a storage
root or tuberous root. Hortus Third also says D. bulbifera produces
aerial tubers, and some Dioscorea species have rhizomes. A few
websites even claim some Dioscorea species do have corms.

Distinctions between types of modified stems, such as stolons,
rhizomes, tubers and corms, are not always clear cut.

Reference


http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&i...orm&btnG=Googl
e+Search


David R. Hershey



"Cereoid+10" wrote in message

om...
Sorry Spammy Davis, Jr. but you have already jumped to wrong conclusions

and
that does not help.

The rootstock of Dioscorea is a tuber not a corm. A corm is covered by a
tunic but a tuber is not.

Dioscorea is a huge genus and even includes a number of cold hardy

species.

The "Sweet Potato" Ipomoea batatas is a "Morning Glory" with tuberous

roots.


I Don't Like Spam wrote in message
...
In article ,
blair wrote:
I was at somebody's house once and they had a big sprawling plant

with
heart
shaped leaves. They said that they grew it by putting a relative of

the
yam
family into the ground and planting it. Apparently you could also

plant a
yam and grow a different plant as well.

Does anyone know what this plant is?
When I was in college, a friend planted a sweet potato in a pot and
let it grow. Later she told her room-mate that it was a "heart-shaped
wandering jew". This was believed until an energetic pet knocked the
pot over, breaking it, revealing the true nature of the plant. As
mentioned earlier, sweet potato is in Convolvulaceae, with morning
glories.

I wouldn't have brought this up, except sitting on my window sill here
at work is a member of the yam family Dioscoreaceae, _Dioscorea
macrostachya_, (dormant right now) the leaves of which are very
similar to the heart shaped leaves of sweet potato. This grows from a
large corm that is quite interesting in appearance. In nature this
corm is hidden underground, but when sold as a houseplant, the organ
is kept above ground for show (some of the larger, older ones resemble
a tortoise shell, at least if you have an active imagination).

So, before we jump to conclusions about exactly what the plant is,
there ARE some members of the yam family kept as houseplants that fit
your description (although, in general, they are a bit pricey, and not
very common except perhaps through specialty succulent dealers).

Sweet potatoes as sold in the US, often called yams (oh the wonders of
misleading common names). Ask your friend if they could allow you to
take a look at the underground stem by brusing away a little soil. If
it looks like a sweet potato, it probably is. Otherwise, my Dioscorea
has a THIN, SINGLE, TOUGH twining vine that comes from the TOP of a
CORM-like structure. If I recall correctly, a sweet potato would
likely have SEVERAL sprouts coming from a VARIOUS POINTS along a
HORIZONTAL TUBER, and those sprouts would tend to be more FLESHY or
SUCCULENT, at least close to the tuber.

Hope this helps.

  #9   Report Post  
Old 05-04-2003, 04:32 PM
Cereoid+10
 
Posts: n/a
Default plant that grows from a relative of the Yam family?

Rootstock is the stock from which the roots, stems and leaves arise.
What is so confusing about that?
The old definition is the original correct definition.

You seem to be getting the definition backwards. Stock is the base word to
the term not root. You insist upon making thing far more complicated than
necessary. Maybe you should stick to chocolate bars and stop trying to
confuse everybody. Just because malaprops tend to become common usage by the
great unwashed and eventually get listed in dictionaries, that doesn't mean
they are correct usage of the terms. Common usage can be nothing but bull
shit. Tubers have even been mistaken for bulbs in common usage.

Yes, there is more than one type of tuber even though the terminology has
not been developed to define all of them thoroughly. Various types of tubers
can have the growing points on their surface, forming a ring or restricted
to the apex, depending on the species. A true corm is a tuber covered by a
tunic, as in the Crocus. The tuber of Cyclamen and tuberous Begonias lack
any tunic.

Saying epigeal tubers or tubers in leaf axils are not "true tubers" is
nonsense. There is no reason to believe that tubers can only be subterranean
organs.

As I have said before, you should look at the actual plants first hand
before waxing pedantic over references based on second and third hand
information. You might actually learn something!


David Hershey wrote in message
om...
Rootstock is one of several botanical terms that have multiple
definitions. You seem to be referring to the old gardening definition
of rootstock as a synonym for rhizome or underground stem. Using
rootstock as a term for a stem is obviously confusing and therefore
undesirable.

The more useful definition of rootstock is the root bearing part of a
grafted plant. However, even when applied to grafting, rootstock is
somewhat misleading. Less misleading terms are understock or stock. A
stock may consist solely of root tissue. However, a stock is usually
going to consist mostly of root tissue with a small amount of stem
tissue. The stock of a topgrafted fruit tree will contain considerable
stem tissue. A stock may include an underground stem but usually it
will not. About the only plant with tubers that is occasionally
grafted is potato. Tomato is grafted on potato as a novelty or for
research.

I mentioned several botanical sources, not just Websters Dictionary.
You mentioned no sources. Katherine Esau was a well respected plant
anatomist. The root chapter in her textbook, Anatomy of Seed Plants,
2nd ed. says Dioscorea has "storage roots." Maybe Esau, Hortus Third
and the half dozen college botany textbooks I consulted are wrong and
Dioscorea does have tubers and not storage roots as you contend. If
so, where is some published proof of that? I checked Simpson and
Ogorzally (1986) which says there is controversy whether Dioscorea
storage organs represent stem or root tissue.

Terms for modified stems are not uniformly defined and are often
confusing. There seems to be more diversity in underground stems than
can be accomodated by the handful of terms commonly used. Tuberous
root and tuber are particularly confusing terms. The term storage root
seems to be preferred over tuberous root in botany textbooks and is
certainly more accurate.

There are different definitions for tuber. Some authorities restrict
tuber to a swollen underground organ that develops from a rhizome or
stolon. By that definition, tuberous begonia and cyclamen do not
produce tubers although they are commonly called tubers. Cyclamen is
often referred to as a corm as well. Their storage organs develop
mainly from the hypocotyl and have a vertical orientation, not the
horizontal orientation of a "true" tuber. They are sometimes termed
tuberous stems instead (Hartmann and Kester 1983). However, that term
adds additional confusion. The aerial tubers of some Dioscorea species
are also not "true" tubers and are sometimes termed tubercles or
bulbils.

David R. Hershey


References

Hartmann, H.T. and Kester, D.E. 1983. Plant Propagation: Principles
and Practices. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Simpson, B.B. and Ogorzally, M.C. 1986. Economic Botany: Plants in Our
World. NY: McGraw-Hill.




"Cereoid+10" wrote in message

...
The term rootsock does not mean the same as true roots. Roostock refers

to
the central body of perennial plants and can be rhizomes, tubers, bulbs,
etc.

Webster's (which is not a botanical reference anyway) is wrong. The
rootstock of Dioscorea is a tuber. Often it is fleshy but it can be

woody
and caudiciform. None have tunicated corms.

You should look for yourself rather than rely on sources based on second

or
third hand information.


David Hershey wrote in message
om...
A rootstock cannot be a tuber because a tuber is a modified stem.

A variety of terms are applied to storage structures of Dioscorea.
Katherine Esau in her Anatomy of Seed Plants text, Hortus Third,
Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary (under yam) and all the college
introductory botany texts I checked all say Dioscorea has a storage
root or tuberous root. Hortus Third also says D. bulbifera produces
aerial tubers, and some Dioscorea species have rhizomes. A few
websites even claim some Dioscorea species do have corms.

Distinctions between types of modified stems, such as stolons,
rhizomes, tubers and corms, are not always clear cut.

Reference



http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&i...orm&btnG=Googl
e+Search


David R. Hershey



"Cereoid+10" wrote in message

om...
Sorry Spammy Davis, Jr. but you have already jumped to wrong

conclusions
and
that does not help.

The rootstock of Dioscorea is a tuber not a corm. A corm is covered

by a
tunic but a tuber is not.

Dioscorea is a huge genus and even includes a number of cold hardy

species.

The "Sweet Potato" Ipomoea batatas is a "Morning Glory" with

tuberous
roots.


I Don't Like Spam wrote in message
...
In article ,
blair wrote:
I was at somebody's house once and they had a big sprawling plant

with
heart
shaped leaves. They said that they grew it by putting a relative

of
the
yam
family into the ground and planting it. Apparently you could also

plant a
yam and grow a different plant as well.

Does anyone know what this plant is?
When I was in college, a friend planted a sweet potato in a pot

and
let it grow. Later she told her room-mate that it was a

"heart-shaped
wandering jew". This was believed until an energetic pet knocked

the
pot over, breaking it, revealing the true nature of the plant. As
mentioned earlier, sweet potato is in Convolvulaceae, with morning
glories.

I wouldn't have brought this up, except sitting on my window sill

here
at work is a member of the yam family Dioscoreaceae, _Dioscorea
macrostachya_, (dormant right now) the leaves of which are very
similar to the heart shaped leaves of sweet potato. This grows

from a
large corm that is quite interesting in appearance. In nature this
corm is hidden underground, but when sold as a houseplant, the

organ
is kept above ground for show (some of the larger, older ones

resemble
a tortoise shell, at least if you have an active imagination).

So, before we jump to conclusions about exactly what the plant is,
there ARE some members of the yam family kept as houseplants that

fit
your description (although, in general, they are a bit pricey, and

not
very common except perhaps through specialty succulent dealers).

Sweet potatoes as sold in the US, often called yams (oh the

wonders of
misleading common names). Ask your friend if they could allow you

to
take a look at the underground stem by brusing away a little soil.

If
it looks like a sweet potato, it probably is. Otherwise, my

Dioscorea
has a THIN, SINGLE, TOUGH twining vine that comes from the TOP of

a
CORM-like structure. If I recall correctly, a sweet potato would
likely have SEVERAL sprouts coming from a VARIOUS POINTS along a
HORIZONTAL TUBER, and those sprouts would tend to be more FLESHY

or
SUCCULENT, at least close to the tuber.

Hope this helps.



  #10   Report Post  
Old 05-04-2003, 04:32 PM
David Hershey
 
Posts: n/a
Default plant that grows from a relative of the Yam family?

What book defines rootstock as "the stock from which the roots, stems
and leaves arise"? You seem to be making up your own definition and
creating a new plant organ, the stock, that is neither root, stem or
leaf.

Gray's Manual of Botany defines rootstock as "a rhizome."
Bailey's Manual of Cultivated Plants defines it as "same as rhizome."
Hortus Third defines it as "subterranean stem, rhizome."
Rost et al's 1979 Botany text defines it as "an elongated,
underground, horizontal stem."

Newer botany texts I consulted don't define rootstock or define it
only in the context of grafting.

You keep saying I "should look at the actual plants first hand." Have
you examined every known species of Dioscorea to determine of they
have tubers or storage roots?

What book defines corm as "A true corm is a tuber covered by a tunic,
as in the Crocus."?
Not all corms have a tunic:
http://virtual.clemson.edu/groups/ho...type.htm#corms

"Tubers" of tuberous begonia and cyclamen do not fit the common
definition of tuber as a swollen
tip of a rhizome. They are enlarged hypocotyls:
http://virtual.clemson.edu/groups/ho...e.htm#enlarged


David R. Hershey





"Cereoid+10" wrote in message ...
Rootstock is the stock from which the roots, stems and leaves arise.
What is so confusing about that?
The old definition is the original correct definition.

You seem to be getting the definition backwards. Stock is the base word to
the term not root. You insist upon making thing far more complicated than
necessary. Maybe you should stick to chocolate bars and stop trying to
confuse everybody. Just because malaprops tend to become common usage by the
great unwashed and eventually get listed in dictionaries, that doesn't mean
they are correct usage of the terms. Common usage can be nothing but bull
shit. Tubers have even been mistaken for bulbs in common usage.

Yes, there is more than one type of tuber even though the terminology has
not been developed to define all of them thoroughly. Various types of tubers
can have the growing points on their surface, forming a ring or restricted
to the apex, depending on the species. A true corm is a tuber covered by a
tunic, as in the Crocus. The tuber of Cyclamen and tuberous Begonias lack
any tunic.

Saying epigeal tubers or tubers in leaf axils are not "true tubers" is
nonsense. There is no reason to believe that tubers can only be subterranean
organs.

As I have said before, you should look at the actual plants first hand
before waxing pedantic over references based on second and third hand
information. You might actually learn something!


David Hershey wrote in message
om...
Rootstock is one of several botanical terms that have multiple
definitions. You seem to be referring to the old gardening definition
of rootstock as a synonym for rhizome or underground stem. Using
rootstock as a term for a stem is obviously confusing and therefore
undesirable.

The more useful definition of rootstock is the root bearing part of a
grafted plant. However, even when applied to grafting, rootstock is
somewhat misleading. Less misleading terms are understock or stock. A
stock may consist solely of root tissue. However, a stock is usually
going to consist mostly of root tissue with a small amount of stem
tissue. The stock of a topgrafted fruit tree will contain considerable
stem tissue. A stock may include an underground stem but usually it
will not. About the only plant with tubers that is occasionally
grafted is potato. Tomato is grafted on potato as a novelty or for
research.

I mentioned several botanical sources, not just Websters Dictionary.
You mentioned no sources. Katherine Esau was a well respected plant
anatomist. The root chapter in her textbook, Anatomy of Seed Plants,
2nd ed. says Dioscorea has "storage roots." Maybe Esau, Hortus Third
and the half dozen college botany textbooks I consulted are wrong and
Dioscorea does have tubers and not storage roots as you contend. If
so, where is some published proof of that? I checked Simpson and
Ogorzally (1986) which says there is controversy whether Dioscorea
storage organs represent stem or root tissue.

Terms for modified stems are not uniformly defined and are often
confusing. There seems to be more diversity in underground stems than
can be accomodated by the handful of terms commonly used. Tuberous
root and tuber are particularly confusing terms. The term storage root
seems to be preferred over tuberous root in botany textbooks and is
certainly more accurate.

There are different definitions for tuber. Some authorities restrict
tuber to a swollen underground organ that develops from a rhizome or
stolon. By that definition, tuberous begonia and cyclamen do not
produce tubers although they are commonly called tubers. Cyclamen is
often referred to as a corm as well. Their storage organs develop
mainly from the hypocotyl and have a vertical orientation, not the
horizontal orientation of a "true" tuber. They are sometimes termed
tuberous stems instead (Hartmann and Kester 1983). However, that term
adds additional confusion. The aerial tubers of some Dioscorea species
are also not "true" tubers and are sometimes termed tubercles or
bulbils.

David R. Hershey


References

Hartmann, H.T. and Kester, D.E. 1983. Plant Propagation: Principles
and Practices. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Simpson, B.B. and Ogorzally, M.C. 1986. Economic Botany: Plants in Our
World. NY: McGraw-Hill.




"Cereoid+10" wrote in message

...
The term rootsock does not mean the same as true roots. Roostock refers

to
the central body of perennial plants and can be rhizomes, tubers, bulbs,
etc.

Webster's (which is not a botanical reference anyway) is wrong. The
rootstock of Dioscorea is a tuber. Often it is fleshy but it can be

woody
and caudiciform. None have tunicated corms.

You should look for yourself rather than rely on sources based on second

or
third hand information.


David Hershey wrote in message
om...
A rootstock cannot be a tuber because a tuber is a modified stem.

A variety of terms are applied to storage structures of Dioscorea.
Katherine Esau in her Anatomy of Seed Plants text, Hortus Third,
Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary (under yam) and all the college
introductory botany texts I checked all say Dioscorea has a storage
root or tuberous root. Hortus Third also says D. bulbifera produces
aerial tubers, and some Dioscorea species have rhizomes. A few
websites even claim some Dioscorea species do have corms.

Distinctions between types of modified stems, such as stolons,
rhizomes, tubers and corms, are not always clear cut.

Reference



http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&i...orm&btnG=Googl
e+Search


David R. Hershey



"Cereoid+10" wrote in message

om...
Sorry Spammy Davis, Jr. but you have already jumped to wrong

conclusions
and
that does not help.

The rootstock of Dioscorea is a tuber not a corm. A corm is covered

by a
tunic but a tuber is not.

Dioscorea is a huge genus and even includes a number of cold hardy

species.

The "Sweet Potato" Ipomoea batatas is a "Morning Glory" with

tuberous
roots.


I Don't Like Spam wrote in message
...
In article ,
blair wrote:
I was at somebody's house once and they had a big sprawling plant
with
heart
shaped leaves. They said that they grew it by putting a relative

of
the
yam
family into the ground and planting it. Apparently you could also

plant a
yam and grow a different plant as well.

Does anyone know what this plant is?
When I was in college, a friend planted a sweet potato in a pot

and
let it grow. Later she told her room-mate that it was a

"heart-shaped
wandering jew". This was believed until an energetic pet knocked

the
pot over, breaking it, revealing the true nature of the plant. As
mentioned earlier, sweet potato is in Convolvulaceae, with morning
glories.

I wouldn't have brought this up, except sitting on my window sill

here
at work is a member of the yam family Dioscoreaceae, _Dioscorea
macrostachya_, (dormant right now) the leaves of which are very
similar to the heart shaped leaves of sweet potato. This grows

from a
large corm that is quite interesting in appearance. In nature this
corm is hidden underground, but when sold as a houseplant, the

organ
is kept above ground for show (some of the larger, older ones

resemble
a tortoise shell, at least if you have an active imagination).

So, before we jump to conclusions about exactly what the plant is,
there ARE some members of the yam family kept as houseplants that

fit
your description (although, in general, they are a bit pricey, and

not
very common except perhaps through specialty succulent dealers).

Sweet potatoes as sold in the US, often called yams (oh the

wonders of
misleading common names). Ask your friend if they could allow you

to
take a look at the underground stem by brusing away a little soil.

If
it looks like a sweet potato, it probably is. Otherwise, my

Dioscorea
has a THIN, SINGLE, TOUGH twining vine that comes from the TOP of

a
CORM-like structure. If I recall correctly, a sweet potato would
likely have SEVERAL sprouts coming from a VARIOUS POINTS along a
HORIZONTAL TUBER, and those sprouts would tend to be more FLESHY

or
SUCCULENT, at least close to the tuber.

Hope this helps.



  #11   Report Post  
Old 05-04-2003, 04:32 PM
Cereoid+10
 
Posts: n/a
Default plant that grows from a relative of the Yam family?

Where have you been, bookworm? Have you been too busy stunting trees to wax
pedantic over nothing? You read too much yet have learned nothing. If you
look hard enough, you can find conflicting definitions of almost anything.
You might as well go back to stunting trees. You have beaten your yam to
death and nobody cares anymore.


David Hershey wrote in message
om...
What book defines rootstock as "the stock from which the roots, stems
and leaves arise"? You seem to be making up your own definition and
creating a new plant organ, the stock, that is neither root, stem or
leaf.

Gray's Manual of Botany defines rootstock as "a rhizome."
Bailey's Manual of Cultivated Plants defines it as "same as rhizome."
Hortus Third defines it as "subterranean stem, rhizome."
Rost et al's 1979 Botany text defines it as "an elongated,
underground, horizontal stem."

Newer botany texts I consulted don't define rootstock or define it
only in the context of grafting.

You keep saying I "should look at the actual plants first hand." Have
you examined every known species of Dioscorea to determine of they
have tubers or storage roots?

What book defines corm as "A true corm is a tuber covered by a tunic,
as in the Crocus."?
Not all corms have a tunic:
http://virtual.clemson.edu/groups/ho...type.htm#corms

"Tubers" of tuberous begonia and cyclamen do not fit the common
definition of tuber as a swollen
tip of a rhizome. They are enlarged hypocotyls:
http://virtual.clemson.edu/groups/ho...e.htm#enlarged


David R. Hershey





"Cereoid+10" wrote in message

...
Rootstock is the stock from which the roots, stems and leaves arise.
What is so confusing about that?
The old definition is the original correct definition.

You seem to be getting the definition backwards. Stock is the base word

to
the term not root. You insist upon making thing far more complicated

than
necessary. Maybe you should stick to chocolate bars and stop trying to
confuse everybody. Just because malaprops tend to become common usage by

the
great unwashed and eventually get listed in dictionaries, that doesn't

mean
they are correct usage of the terms. Common usage can be nothing but

bull
shit. Tubers have even been mistaken for bulbs in common usage.

Yes, there is more than one type of tuber even though the terminology

has
not been developed to define all of them thoroughly. Various types of

tubers
can have the growing points on their surface, forming a ring or

restricted
to the apex, depending on the species. A true corm is a tuber covered by

a
tunic, as in the Crocus. The tuber of Cyclamen and tuberous Begonias

lack
any tunic.

Saying epigeal tubers or tubers in leaf axils are not "true tubers" is
nonsense. There is no reason to believe that tubers can only be

subterranean
organs.

As I have said before, you should look at the actual plants first hand
before waxing pedantic over references based on second and third hand
information. You might actually learn something!


David Hershey wrote in message
om...
Rootstock is one of several botanical terms that have multiple
definitions. You seem to be referring to the old gardening definition
of rootstock as a synonym for rhizome or underground stem. Using
rootstock as a term for a stem is obviously confusing and therefore
undesirable.

The more useful definition of rootstock is the root bearing part of a
grafted plant. However, even when applied to grafting, rootstock is
somewhat misleading. Less misleading terms are understock or stock. A
stock may consist solely of root tissue. However, a stock is usually
going to consist mostly of root tissue with a small amount of stem
tissue. The stock of a topgrafted fruit tree will contain considerable
stem tissue. A stock may include an underground stem but usually it
will not. About the only plant with tubers that is occasionally
grafted is potato. Tomato is grafted on potato as a novelty or for
research.

I mentioned several botanical sources, not just Websters Dictionary.
You mentioned no sources. Katherine Esau was a well respected plant
anatomist. The root chapter in her textbook, Anatomy of Seed Plants,
2nd ed. says Dioscorea has "storage roots." Maybe Esau, Hortus Third
and the half dozen college botany textbooks I consulted are wrong and
Dioscorea does have tubers and not storage roots as you contend. If
so, where is some published proof of that? I checked Simpson and
Ogorzally (1986) which says there is controversy whether Dioscorea
storage organs represent stem or root tissue.

Terms for modified stems are not uniformly defined and are often
confusing. There seems to be more diversity in underground stems than
can be accomodated by the handful of terms commonly used. Tuberous
root and tuber are particularly confusing terms. The term storage root
seems to be preferred over tuberous root in botany textbooks and is
certainly more accurate.

There are different definitions for tuber. Some authorities restrict
tuber to a swollen underground organ that develops from a rhizome or
stolon. By that definition, tuberous begonia and cyclamen do not
produce tubers although they are commonly called tubers. Cyclamen is
often referred to as a corm as well. Their storage organs develop
mainly from the hypocotyl and have a vertical orientation, not the
horizontal orientation of a "true" tuber. They are sometimes termed
tuberous stems instead (Hartmann and Kester 1983). However, that term
adds additional confusion. The aerial tubers of some Dioscorea species
are also not "true" tubers and are sometimes termed tubercles or
bulbils.

David R. Hershey


References

Hartmann, H.T. and Kester, D.E. 1983. Plant Propagation: Principles
and Practices. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Simpson, B.B. and Ogorzally, M.C. 1986. Economic Botany: Plants in Our
World. NY: McGraw-Hill.




"Cereoid+10" wrote in message

...
The term rootsock does not mean the same as true roots. Roostock

refers
to
the central body of perennial plants and can be rhizomes, tubers,

bulbs,
etc.

Webster's (which is not a botanical reference anyway) is wrong. The
rootstock of Dioscorea is a tuber. Often it is fleshy but it can be

woody
and caudiciform. None have tunicated corms.

You should look for yourself rather than rely on sources based on

second
or
third hand information.


David Hershey wrote in message
om...
A rootstock cannot be a tuber because a tuber is a modified stem.

A variety of terms are applied to storage structures of Dioscorea.
Katherine Esau in her Anatomy of Seed Plants text, Hortus Third,
Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary (under yam) and all the

college
introductory botany texts I checked all say Dioscorea has a

storage
root or tuberous root. Hortus Third also says D. bulbifera

produces
aerial tubers, and some Dioscorea species have rhizomes. A few
websites even claim some Dioscorea species do have corms.

Distinctions between types of modified stems, such as stolons,
rhizomes, tubers and corms, are not always clear cut.

Reference




http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&i...orm&btnG=Googl
e+Search


David R. Hershey



"Cereoid+10" wrote in message

om...
Sorry Spammy Davis, Jr. but you have already jumped to wrong

conclusions
and
that does not help.

The rootstock of Dioscorea is a tuber not a corm. A corm is

covered
by a
tunic but a tuber is not.

Dioscorea is a huge genus and even includes a number of cold

hardy
species.

The "Sweet Potato" Ipomoea batatas is a "Morning Glory" with

tuberous
roots.


I Don't Like Spam wrote in message
...
In article ,
blair wrote:
I was at somebody's house once and they had a big sprawling

plant
with
heart
shaped leaves. They said that they grew it by putting a

relative
of
the
yam
family into the ground and planting it. Apparently you could

also
plant a
yam and grow a different plant as well.

Does anyone know what this plant is?
When I was in college, a friend planted a sweet potato in a

pot
and
let it grow. Later she told her room-mate that it was a

"heart-shaped
wandering jew". This was believed until an energetic pet

knocked
the
pot over, breaking it, revealing the true nature of the plant.

As
mentioned earlier, sweet potato is in Convolvulaceae, with

morning
glories.

I wouldn't have brought this up, except sitting on my window

sill
here
at work is a member of the yam family Dioscoreaceae,

_Dioscorea
macrostachya_, (dormant right now) the leaves of which are

very
similar to the heart shaped leaves of sweet potato. This grows

from a
large corm that is quite interesting in appearance. In nature

this
corm is hidden underground, but when sold as a houseplant, the

organ
is kept above ground for show (some of the larger, older ones

resemble
a tortoise shell, at least if you have an active imagination).

So, before we jump to conclusions about exactly what the plant

is,
there ARE some members of the yam family kept as houseplants

that
fit
your description (although, in general, they are a bit pricey,

and
not
very common except perhaps through specialty succulent

dealers).

Sweet potatoes as sold in the US, often called yams (oh the

wonders of
misleading common names). Ask your friend if they could allow

you
to
take a look at the underground stem by brusing away a little

soil.
If
it looks like a sweet potato, it probably is. Otherwise, my

Dioscorea
has a THIN, SINGLE, TOUGH twining vine that comes from the TOP

of
a
CORM-like structure. If I recall correctly, a sweet potato

would
likely have SEVERAL sprouts coming from a VARIOUS POINTS along

a
HORIZONTAL TUBER, and those sprouts would tend to be more

FLESHY
or
SUCCULENT, at least close to the tuber.

Hope this helps.



  #12   Report Post  
Old 05-04-2003, 04:32 PM
David Hershey
 
Posts: n/a
Default plant that grows from a relative of the Yam family?

Instead of making up your own definitions for common botanical terms,
such as rootstock, you should check a book and see how botanists
actually define them.

It doesn't seem like you have any first-hand experience with Dioscorea
yourself since you won't attest to it even when I ask.

The easiest way to answer questions on uncommon plants, such as
Dioscorea, is to look up the answer in books. It's not realistic to
expect to go to a botanic garden and have them dig up their specimens
so they can be examined for tubers or storage roots.

I'm sure somewhere in the botanical literature there are anatomical
studies on storage roots or tubers of Dioscorea.

David R. Hershey


"Cereoid+10" wrote in message m...
Where have you been, bookworm? Have you been too busy stunting trees to wax
pedantic over nothing? You read too much yet have learned nothing. If you
look hard enough, you can find conflicting definitions of almost anything.
You might as well go back to stunting trees. You have beaten your yam to
death and nobody cares anymore.


David Hershey wrote in message
om...
What book defines rootstock as "the stock from which the roots, stems
and leaves arise"? You seem to be making up your own definition and
creating a new plant organ, the stock, that is neither root, stem or
leaf.

Gray's Manual of Botany defines rootstock as "a rhizome."
Bailey's Manual of Cultivated Plants defines it as "same as rhizome."
Hortus Third defines it as "subterranean stem, rhizome."
Rost et al's 1979 Botany text defines it as "an elongated,
underground, horizontal stem."

Newer botany texts I consulted don't define rootstock or define it
only in the context of grafting.

You keep saying I "should look at the actual plants first hand." Have
you examined every known species of Dioscorea to determine of they
have tubers or storage roots?

What book defines corm as "A true corm is a tuber covered by a tunic,
as in the Crocus."?
Not all corms have a tunic:
http://virtual.clemson.edu/groups/ho...type.htm#corms

"Tubers" of tuberous begonia and cyclamen do not fit the common
definition of tuber as a swollen
tip of a rhizome. They are enlarged hypocotyls:
http://virtual.clemson.edu/groups/ho...e.htm#enlarged


David R. Hershey





"Cereoid+10" wrote in message

...
Rootstock is the stock from which the roots, stems and leaves arise.
What is so confusing about that?
The old definition is the original correct definition.

You seem to be getting the definition backwards. Stock is the base word

to
the term not root. You insist upon making thing far more complicated

than
necessary. Maybe you should stick to chocolate bars and stop trying to
confuse everybody. Just because malaprops tend to become common usage by

the
great unwashed and eventually get listed in dictionaries, that doesn't

mean
they are correct usage of the terms. Common usage can be nothing but

bull
shit. Tubers have even been mistaken for bulbs in common usage.

Yes, there is more than one type of tuber even though the terminology

has
not been developed to define all of them thoroughly. Various types of

tubers
can have the growing points on their surface, forming a ring or

restricted
to the apex, depending on the species. A true corm is a tuber covered by

a
tunic, as in the Crocus. The tuber of Cyclamen and tuberous Begonias

lack
any tunic.

Saying epigeal tubers or tubers in leaf axils are not "true tubers" is
nonsense. There is no reason to believe that tubers can only be

subterranean
organs.

As I have said before, you should look at the actual plants first hand
before waxing pedantic over references based on second and third hand
information. You might actually learn something!


David Hershey wrote in message
om...
Rootstock is one of several botanical terms that have multiple
definitions. You seem to be referring to the old gardening definition
of rootstock as a synonym for rhizome or underground stem. Using
rootstock as a term for a stem is obviously confusing and therefore
undesirable.

The more useful definition of rootstock is the root bearing part of a
grafted plant. However, even when applied to grafting, rootstock is
somewhat misleading. Less misleading terms are understock or stock. A
stock may consist solely of root tissue. However, a stock is usually
going to consist mostly of root tissue with a small amount of stem
tissue. The stock of a topgrafted fruit tree will contain considerable
stem tissue. A stock may include an underground stem but usually it
will not. About the only plant with tubers that is occasionally
grafted is potato. Tomato is grafted on potato as a novelty or for
research.

I mentioned several botanical sources, not just Websters Dictionary.
You mentioned no sources. Katherine Esau was a well respected plant
anatomist. The root chapter in her textbook, Anatomy of Seed Plants,
2nd ed. says Dioscorea has "storage roots." Maybe Esau, Hortus Third
and the half dozen college botany textbooks I consulted are wrong and
Dioscorea does have tubers and not storage roots as you contend. If
so, where is some published proof of that? I checked Simpson and
Ogorzally (1986) which says there is controversy whether Dioscorea
storage organs represent stem or root tissue.

Terms for modified stems are not uniformly defined and are often
confusing. There seems to be more diversity in underground stems than
can be accomodated by the handful of terms commonly used. Tuberous
root and tuber are particularly confusing terms. The term storage root
seems to be preferred over tuberous root in botany textbooks and is
certainly more accurate.

There are different definitions for tuber. Some authorities restrict
tuber to a swollen underground organ that develops from a rhizome or
stolon. By that definition, tuberous begonia and cyclamen do not
produce tubers although they are commonly called tubers. Cyclamen is
often referred to as a corm as well. Their storage organs develop
mainly from the hypocotyl and have a vertical orientation, not the
horizontal orientation of a "true" tuber. They are sometimes termed
tuberous stems instead (Hartmann and Kester 1983). However, that term
adds additional confusion. The aerial tubers of some Dioscorea species
are also not "true" tubers and are sometimes termed tubercles or
bulbils.

David R. Hershey


References

Hartmann, H.T. and Kester, D.E. 1983. Plant Propagation: Principles
and Practices. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Simpson, B.B. and Ogorzally, M.C. 1986. Economic Botany: Plants in Our
World. NY: McGraw-Hill.




"Cereoid+10" wrote in message

...
The term rootsock does not mean the same as true roots. Roostock

refers
to
the central body of perennial plants and can be rhizomes, tubers,

bulbs,
etc.

Webster's (which is not a botanical reference anyway) is wrong. The
rootstock of Dioscorea is a tuber. Often it is fleshy but it can be

woody
and caudiciform. None have tunicated corms.

You should look for yourself rather than rely on sources based on

second
or
third hand information.


David Hershey wrote in message
om...
A rootstock cannot be a tuber because a tuber is a modified stem.

A variety of terms are applied to storage structures of Dioscorea.
Katherine Esau in her Anatomy of Seed Plants text, Hortus Third,
Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary (under yam) and all the

college
introductory botany texts I checked all say Dioscorea has a

storage
root or tuberous root. Hortus Third also says D. bulbifera

produces
aerial tubers, and some Dioscorea species have rhizomes. A few
websites even claim some Dioscorea species do have corms.

Distinctions between types of modified stems, such as stolons,
rhizomes, tubers and corms, are not always clear cut.

Reference




http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&i...orm&btnG=Googl
e+Search


David R. Hershey



"Cereoid+10" wrote in message

om...
Sorry Spammy Davis, Jr. but you have already jumped to wrong
conclusions
and
that does not help.

The rootstock of Dioscorea is a tuber not a corm. A corm is

covered
by a
tunic but a tuber is not.

Dioscorea is a huge genus and even includes a number of cold

hardy
species.

The "Sweet Potato" Ipomoea batatas is a "Morning Glory" with
tuberous
roots.


I Don't Like Spam wrote in message
...
In article ,
blair wrote:
I was at somebody's house once and they had a big sprawling

plant
with
heart
shaped leaves. They said that they grew it by putting a

relative
of
the
yam
family into the ground and planting it. Apparently you could

also
plant a
yam and grow a different plant as well.

Does anyone know what this plant is?
When I was in college, a friend planted a sweet potato in a

pot
and
let it grow. Later she told her room-mate that it was a

"heart-shaped
wandering jew". This was believed until an energetic pet

knocked
the
pot over, breaking it, revealing the true nature of the plant.

As
mentioned earlier, sweet potato is in Convolvulaceae, with

morning
glories.

I wouldn't have brought this up, except sitting on my window

sill
here
at work is a member of the yam family Dioscoreaceae,

_Dioscorea
macrostachya_, (dormant right now) the leaves of which are

very
similar to the heart shaped leaves of sweet potato. This grows

from a
large corm that is quite interesting in appearance. In nature

this
corm is hidden underground, but when sold as a houseplant, the

organ
is kept above ground for show (some of the larger, older ones

resemble
a tortoise shell, at least if you have an active imagination).

So, before we jump to conclusions about exactly what the plant

is,
there ARE some members of the yam family kept as houseplants

that
fit
your description (although, in general, they are a bit pricey,

and
not
very common except perhaps through specialty succulent

dealers).

Sweet potatoes as sold in the US, often called yams (oh the

wonders of
misleading common names). Ask your friend if they could allow

you
to
take a look at the underground stem by brusing away a little

soil.
If
it looks like a sweet potato, it probably is. Otherwise, my

Dioscorea
has a THIN, SINGLE, TOUGH twining vine that comes from the TOP

of
a
CORM-like structure. If I recall correctly, a sweet potato

would
likely have SEVERAL sprouts coming from a VARIOUS POINTS along

a
HORIZONTAL TUBER, and those sprouts would tend to be more

FLESHY
or
SUCCULENT, at least close to the tuber.

Hope this helps.

  #13   Report Post  
Old 05-04-2003, 04:32 PM
Cereoid+10
 
Posts: n/a
Default plant that grows from a relative of the Yam family?

Dictionaries aren't written by botanists, buckwheat.

If you are so sure that somewhere in the botanical literature there are
anatomical studies on storage roots or tubers of Dioscorea, find them before
rambling off bad definitions as if they were gospel. If you were as
interested in the plants as you pretend to be, you would have made the
effort to see them first hand and learn more about them instead of
continuing to be stupid. Dioscorea are not uncommon plants. They are used
pharmaceutically as a source of steroidal drugs. Despite all your reading,
you still haven't learned a thing. Stop wasting everybody's time, fool.



David Hershey wrote in message
om...
Instead of making up your own definitions for common botanical terms,
such as rootstock, you should check a book and see how botanists
actually define them.

It doesn't seem like you have any first-hand experience with Dioscorea
yourself since you won't attest to it even when I ask.

The easiest way to answer questions on uncommon plants, such as
Dioscorea, is to look up the answer in books. It's not realistic to
expect to go to a botanic garden and have them dig up their specimens
so they can be examined for tubers or storage roots.

I'm sure somewhere in the botanical literature there are anatomical
studies on storage roots or tubers of Dioscorea.

David R. Hershey


"Cereoid+10" wrote in message

m...
Where have you been, bookworm? Have you been too busy stunting trees to

wax
pedantic over nothing? You read too much yet have learned nothing. If

you
look hard enough, you can find conflicting definitions of almost

anything.
You might as well go back to stunting trees. You have beaten your yam to
death and nobody cares anymore.


David Hershey wrote in message
om...
What book defines rootstock as "the stock from which the roots, stems
and leaves arise"? You seem to be making up your own definition and
creating a new plant organ, the stock, that is neither root, stem or
leaf.

Gray's Manual of Botany defines rootstock as "a rhizome."
Bailey's Manual of Cultivated Plants defines it as "same as rhizome."
Hortus Third defines it as "subterranean stem, rhizome."
Rost et al's 1979 Botany text defines it as "an elongated,
underground, horizontal stem."

Newer botany texts I consulted don't define rootstock or define it
only in the context of grafting.

You keep saying I "should look at the actual plants first hand." Have
you examined every known species of Dioscorea to determine of they
have tubers or storage roots?

What book defines corm as "A true corm is a tuber covered by a tunic,
as in the Crocus."?
Not all corms have a tunic:
http://virtual.clemson.edu/groups/ho...type.htm#corms

"Tubers" of tuberous begonia and cyclamen do not fit the common
definition of tuber as a swollen
tip of a rhizome. They are enlarged hypocotyls:

http://virtual.clemson.edu/groups/ho...e.htm#enlarged


David R. Hershey





"Cereoid+10" wrote in message

...
Rootstock is the stock from which the roots, stems and leaves arise.
What is so confusing about that?
The old definition is the original correct definition.

You seem to be getting the definition backwards. Stock is the base

word
to
the term not root. You insist upon making thing far more complicated

than
necessary. Maybe you should stick to chocolate bars and stop trying

to
confuse everybody. Just because malaprops tend to become common

usage by
the
great unwashed and eventually get listed in dictionaries, that

doesn't
mean
they are correct usage of the terms. Common usage can be nothing but

bull
shit. Tubers have even been mistaken for bulbs in common usage.

Yes, there is more than one type of tuber even though the

terminology
has
not been developed to define all of them thoroughly. Various types

of
tubers
can have the growing points on their surface, forming a ring or

restricted
to the apex, depending on the species. A true corm is a tuber

covered by
a
tunic, as in the Crocus. The tuber of Cyclamen and tuberous Begonias

lack
any tunic.

Saying epigeal tubers or tubers in leaf axils are not "true tubers"

is
nonsense. There is no reason to believe that tubers can only be

subterranean
organs.

As I have said before, you should look at the actual plants first

hand
before waxing pedantic over references based on second and third

hand
information. You might actually learn something!


David Hershey wrote in message
om...
Rootstock is one of several botanical terms that have multiple
definitions. You seem to be referring to the old gardening

definition
of rootstock as a synonym for rhizome or underground stem. Using
rootstock as a term for a stem is obviously confusing and

therefore
undesirable.

The more useful definition of rootstock is the root bearing part

of a
grafted plant. However, even when applied to grafting, rootstock

is
somewhat misleading. Less misleading terms are understock or

stock. A
stock may consist solely of root tissue. However, a stock is

usually
going to consist mostly of root tissue with a small amount of stem
tissue. The stock of a topgrafted fruit tree will contain

considerable
stem tissue. A stock may include an underground stem but usually

it
will not. About the only plant with tubers that is occasionally
grafted is potato. Tomato is grafted on potato as a novelty or for
research.

I mentioned several botanical sources, not just Websters

Dictionary.
You mentioned no sources. Katherine Esau was a well respected

plant
anatomist. The root chapter in her textbook, Anatomy of Seed

Plants,
2nd ed. says Dioscorea has "storage roots." Maybe Esau, Hortus

Third
and the half dozen college botany textbooks I consulted are wrong

and
Dioscorea does have tubers and not storage roots as you contend.

If
so, where is some published proof of that? I checked Simpson and
Ogorzally (1986) which says there is controversy whether Dioscorea
storage organs represent stem or root tissue.

Terms for modified stems are not uniformly defined and are often
confusing. There seems to be more diversity in underground stems

than
can be accomodated by the handful of terms commonly used. Tuberous
root and tuber are particularly confusing terms. The term storage

root
seems to be preferred over tuberous root in botany textbooks and

is
certainly more accurate.

There are different definitions for tuber. Some authorities

restrict
tuber to a swollen underground organ that develops from a rhizome

or
stolon. By that definition, tuberous begonia and cyclamen do not
produce tubers although they are commonly called tubers. Cyclamen

is
often referred to as a corm as well. Their storage organs develop
mainly from the hypocotyl and have a vertical orientation, not the
horizontal orientation of a "true" tuber. They are sometimes

termed
tuberous stems instead (Hartmann and Kester 1983). However, that

term
adds additional confusion. The aerial tubers of some Dioscorea

species
are also not "true" tubers and are sometimes termed tubercles or
bulbils.

David R. Hershey


References

Hartmann, H.T. and Kester, D.E. 1983. Plant Propagation:

Principles
and Practices. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Simpson, B.B. and Ogorzally, M.C. 1986. Economic Botany: Plants in

Our
World. NY: McGraw-Hill.




"Cereoid+10" wrote in message

...
The term rootsock does not mean the same as true roots. Roostock

refers
to
the central body of perennial plants and can be rhizomes,

tubers,
bulbs,
etc.

Webster's (which is not a botanical reference anyway) is wrong.

The
rootstock of Dioscorea is a tuber. Often it is fleshy but it can

be
woody
and caudiciform. None have tunicated corms.

You should look for yourself rather than rely on sources based

on
second
or
third hand information.


David Hershey wrote in message
om...
A rootstock cannot be a tuber because a tuber is a modified

stem.

A variety of terms are applied to storage structures of

Dioscorea.
Katherine Esau in her Anatomy of Seed Plants text, Hortus

Third,
Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary (under yam) and all the

college
introductory botany texts I checked all say Dioscorea has a

storage
root or tuberous root. Hortus Third also says D. bulbifera

produces
aerial tubers, and some Dioscorea species have rhizomes. A few
websites even claim some Dioscorea species do have corms.

Distinctions between types of modified stems, such as stolons,
rhizomes, tubers and corms, are not always clear cut.

Reference





http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&i...orm&btnG=Googl
e+Search


David R. Hershey



"Cereoid+10" wrote in message

om...
Sorry Spammy Davis, Jr. but you have already jumped to wrong
conclusions
and
that does not help.

The rootstock of Dioscorea is a tuber not a corm. A corm is

covered
by a
tunic but a tuber is not.

Dioscorea is a huge genus and even includes a number of cold

hardy
species.

The "Sweet Potato" Ipomoea batatas is a "Morning Glory" with
tuberous
roots.


I Don't Like Spam wrote in message
...
In article ,
blair wrote:
I was at somebody's house once and they had a big

sprawling
plant
with
heart
shaped leaves. They said that they grew it by putting a

relative
of
the
yam
family into the ground and planting it. Apparently you

could
also
plant a
yam and grow a different plant as well.

Does anyone know what this plant is?
When I was in college, a friend planted a sweet potato in

a
pot
and
let it grow. Later she told her room-mate that it was a

"heart-shaped
wandering jew". This was believed until an energetic pet

knocked
the
pot over, breaking it, revealing the true nature of the

plant.
As
mentioned earlier, sweet potato is in Convolvulaceae, with

morning
glories.

I wouldn't have brought this up, except sitting on my

window
sill
here
at work is a member of the yam family Dioscoreaceae,

_Dioscorea
macrostachya_, (dormant right now) the leaves of which are

very
similar to the heart shaped leaves of sweet potato. This

grows
from a
large corm that is quite interesting in appearance. In

nature
this
corm is hidden underground, but when sold as a houseplant,

the
organ
is kept above ground for show (some of the larger, older

ones
resemble
a tortoise shell, at least if you have an active

imagination).

So, before we jump to conclusions about exactly what the

plant
is,
there ARE some members of the yam family kept as

houseplants
that
fit
your description (although, in general, they are a bit

pricey,
and
not
very common except perhaps through specialty succulent

dealers).

Sweet potatoes as sold in the US, often called yams (oh

the
wonders of
misleading common names). Ask your friend if they could

allow
you
to
take a look at the underground stem by brusing away a

little
soil.
If
it looks like a sweet potato, it probably is. Otherwise,

my
Dioscorea
has a THIN, SINGLE, TOUGH twining vine that comes from the

TOP
of
a
CORM-like structure. If I recall correctly, a sweet potato

would
likely have SEVERAL sprouts coming from a VARIOUS POINTS

along
a
HORIZONTAL TUBER, and those sprouts would tend to be more

FLESHY
or
SUCCULENT, at least close to the tuber.

Hope this helps.



  #14   Report Post  
Old 05-04-2003, 04:32 PM
Vcoerulea
 
Posts: n/a
Default plant that grows from a relative of the Yam family?

Who's the fool? You're grasping at straws, old man. Take your own advice. Do
your research instead of just quoting off the top of your head. It's a shame
you waste your intellect wallowing in "archacademia" and acting as the font
of information when you could be learning new stuff, sifting, incorporating,
constructing, and dispensing useful, possibly innovative, information for
all to use. Stop being so abrasive. My grandfather was like that and he died
a lonely old man. No one wants to talk to a know-it-all, especially one who
puts you down and makes you not feel like asking anymore questions because
he'll make a fool of you. If you're that insecure, see a psychiatrist. If
not, try helping someone to learn instead of ridiculing them. When they see
the light and thank you, the feeling is so fantastic. You've made another
human being's life better. Build rather than tearing down. Be a teacher, not
a demolition expert. Can you handle the challenge?

"Cereoid+10" wrote in message
. com...
Dictionaries aren't written by botanists, buckwheat.

If you are so sure that somewhere in the botanical literature there are
anatomical studies on storage roots or tubers of Dioscorea, find them

before
rambling off bad definitions as if they were gospel. If you were as
interested in the plants as you pretend to be, you would have made the
effort to see them first hand and learn more about them instead of
continuing to be stupid. Dioscorea are not uncommon plants. They are used
pharmaceutically as a source of steroidal drugs. Despite all your reading,
you still haven't learned a thing. Stop wasting everybody's time, fool.



David Hershey wrote in message
om...
Instead of making up your own definitions for common botanical terms,
such as rootstock, you should check a book and see how botanists
actually define them.

It doesn't seem like you have any first-hand experience with Dioscorea
yourself since you won't attest to it even when I ask.

The easiest way to answer questions on uncommon plants, such as
Dioscorea, is to look up the answer in books. It's not realistic to
expect to go to a botanic garden and have them dig up their specimens
so they can be examined for tubers or storage roots.

I'm sure somewhere in the botanical literature there are anatomical
studies on storage roots or tubers of Dioscorea.

David R. Hershey


"Cereoid+10" wrote in message

m...
Where have you been, bookworm? Have you been too busy stunting trees

to
wax
pedantic over nothing? You read too much yet have learned nothing. If

you
look hard enough, you can find conflicting definitions of almost

anything.
You might as well go back to stunting trees. You have beaten your yam

to
death and nobody cares anymore.


David Hershey wrote in message
om...
What book defines rootstock as "the stock from which the roots,

stems
and leaves arise"? You seem to be making up your own definition and
creating a new plant organ, the stock, that is neither root, stem or
leaf.

Gray's Manual of Botany defines rootstock as "a rhizome."
Bailey's Manual of Cultivated Plants defines it as "same as

rhizome."
Hortus Third defines it as "subterranean stem, rhizome."
Rost et al's 1979 Botany text defines it as "an elongated,
underground, horizontal stem."

Newer botany texts I consulted don't define rootstock or define it
only in the context of grafting.

You keep saying I "should look at the actual plants first hand."

Have
you examined every known species of Dioscorea to determine of they
have tubers or storage roots?

What book defines corm as "A true corm is a tuber covered by a

tunic,
as in the Crocus."?
Not all corms have a tunic:
http://virtual.clemson.edu/groups/ho...type.htm#corms

"Tubers" of tuberous begonia and cyclamen do not fit the common
definition of tuber as a swollen
tip of a rhizome. They are enlarged hypocotyls:

http://virtual.clemson.edu/groups/ho...e.htm#enlarged


David R. Hershey





"Cereoid+10" wrote in message
...
Rootstock is the stock from which the roots, stems and leaves

arise.
What is so confusing about that?
The old definition is the original correct definition.

You seem to be getting the definition backwards. Stock is the base

word
to
the term not root. You insist upon making thing far more

complicated
than
necessary. Maybe you should stick to chocolate bars and stop

trying
to
confuse everybody. Just because malaprops tend to become common

usage by
the
great unwashed and eventually get listed in dictionaries, that

doesn't
mean
they are correct usage of the terms. Common usage can be nothing

but
bull
shit. Tubers have even been mistaken for bulbs in common usage.

Yes, there is more than one type of tuber even though the

terminology
has
not been developed to define all of them thoroughly. Various types

of
tubers
can have the growing points on their surface, forming a ring or
restricted
to the apex, depending on the species. A true corm is a tuber

covered by
a
tunic, as in the Crocus. The tuber of Cyclamen and tuberous

Begonias
lack
any tunic.

Saying epigeal tubers or tubers in leaf axils are not "true

tubers"
is
nonsense. There is no reason to believe that tubers can only be
subterranean
organs.

As I have said before, you should look at the actual plants first

hand
before waxing pedantic over references based on second and third

hand
information. You might actually learn something!


David Hershey wrote in message
om...
Rootstock is one of several botanical terms that have multiple
definitions. You seem to be referring to the old gardening

definition
of rootstock as a synonym for rhizome or underground stem. Using
rootstock as a term for a stem is obviously confusing and

therefore
undesirable.

The more useful definition of rootstock is the root bearing part

of a
grafted plant. However, even when applied to grafting, rootstock

is
somewhat misleading. Less misleading terms are understock or

stock. A
stock may consist solely of root tissue. However, a stock is

usually
going to consist mostly of root tissue with a small amount of

stem
tissue. The stock of a topgrafted fruit tree will contain

considerable
stem tissue. A stock may include an underground stem but usually

it
will not. About the only plant with tubers that is occasionally
grafted is potato. Tomato is grafted on potato as a novelty or

for
research.

I mentioned several botanical sources, not just Websters

Dictionary.
You mentioned no sources. Katherine Esau was a well respected

plant
anatomist. The root chapter in her textbook, Anatomy of Seed

Plants,
2nd ed. says Dioscorea has "storage roots." Maybe Esau, Hortus

Third
and the half dozen college botany textbooks I consulted are

wrong
and
Dioscorea does have tubers and not storage roots as you contend.

If
so, where is some published proof of that? I checked Simpson and
Ogorzally (1986) which says there is controversy whether

Dioscorea
storage organs represent stem or root tissue.

Terms for modified stems are not uniformly defined and are often
confusing. There seems to be more diversity in underground stems

than
can be accomodated by the handful of terms commonly used.

Tuberous
root and tuber are particularly confusing terms. The term

storage
root
seems to be preferred over tuberous root in botany textbooks and

is
certainly more accurate.

There are different definitions for tuber. Some authorities

restrict
tuber to a swollen underground organ that develops from a

rhizome
or
stolon. By that definition, tuberous begonia and cyclamen do not
produce tubers although they are commonly called tubers.

Cyclamen
is
often referred to as a corm as well. Their storage organs

develop
mainly from the hypocotyl and have a vertical orientation, not

the
horizontal orientation of a "true" tuber. They are sometimes

termed
tuberous stems instead (Hartmann and Kester 1983). However, that

term
adds additional confusion. The aerial tubers of some Dioscorea

species
are also not "true" tubers and are sometimes termed tubercles or
bulbils.

David R. Hershey


References

Hartmann, H.T. and Kester, D.E. 1983. Plant Propagation:

Principles
and Practices. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Simpson, B.B. and Ogorzally, M.C. 1986. Economic Botany: Plants

in
Our
World. NY: McGraw-Hill.




"Cereoid+10" wrote in message
...
The term rootsock does not mean the same as true roots.

Roostock
refers
to
the central body of perennial plants and can be rhizomes,

tubers,
bulbs,
etc.

Webster's (which is not a botanical reference anyway) is

wrong.
The
rootstock of Dioscorea is a tuber. Often it is fleshy but it

can
be
woody
and caudiciform. None have tunicated corms.

You should look for yourself rather than rely on sources based

on
second
or
third hand information.


David Hershey wrote in message
om...
A rootstock cannot be a tuber because a tuber is a modified

stem.

A variety of terms are applied to storage structures of

Dioscorea.
Katherine Esau in her Anatomy of Seed Plants text, Hortus

Third,
Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary (under yam) and all the
college
introductory botany texts I checked all say Dioscorea has a
storage
root or tuberous root. Hortus Third also says D. bulbifera
produces
aerial tubers, and some Dioscorea species have rhizomes. A

few
websites even claim some Dioscorea species do have corms.

Distinctions between types of modified stems, such as

stolons,
rhizomes, tubers and corms, are not always clear cut.

Reference






http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&i...orm&btnG=Googl
e+Search


David R. Hershey



"Cereoid+10" wrote in message
om...
Sorry Spammy Davis, Jr. but you have already jumped to

wrong
conclusions
and
that does not help.

The rootstock of Dioscorea is a tuber not a corm. A corm

is
covered
by a
tunic but a tuber is not.

Dioscorea is a huge genus and even includes a number of

cold
hardy
species.

The "Sweet Potato" Ipomoea batatas is a "Morning Glory"

with
tuberous
roots.


I Don't Like Spam wrote in message
...
In article ,
blair wrote:
I was at somebody's house once and they had a big

sprawling
plant
with
heart
shaped leaves. They said that they grew it by putting a
relative
of
the
yam
family into the ground and planting it. Apparently you

could
also
plant a
yam and grow a different plant as well.

Does anyone know what this plant is?
When I was in college, a friend planted a sweet potato

in
a
pot
and
let it grow. Later she told her room-mate that it was a
"heart-shaped
wandering jew". This was believed until an energetic pet
knocked
the
pot over, breaking it, revealing the true nature of the

plant.
As
mentioned earlier, sweet potato is in Convolvulaceae,

with
morning
glories.

I wouldn't have brought this up, except sitting on my

window
sill
here
at work is a member of the yam family Dioscoreaceae,
_Dioscorea
macrostachya_, (dormant right now) the leaves of which

are
very
similar to the heart shaped leaves of sweet potato. This

grows
from a
large corm that is quite interesting in appearance. In

nature
this
corm is hidden underground, but when sold as a

houseplant,
the
organ
is kept above ground for show (some of the larger, older

ones
resemble
a tortoise shell, at least if you have an active

imagination).

So, before we jump to conclusions about exactly what the

plant
is,
there ARE some members of the yam family kept as

houseplants
that
fit
your description (although, in general, they are a bit

pricey,
and
not
very common except perhaps through specialty succulent
dealers).

Sweet potatoes as sold in the US, often called yams (oh

the
wonders of
misleading common names). Ask your friend if they could

allow
you
to
take a look at the underground stem by brusing away a

little
soil.
If
it looks like a sweet potato, it probably is. Otherwise,

my
Dioscorea
has a THIN, SINGLE, TOUGH twining vine that comes from

the
TOP
of
a
CORM-like structure. If I recall correctly, a sweet

potato
would
likely have SEVERAL sprouts coming from a VARIOUS POINTS

along
a
HORIZONTAL TUBER, and those sprouts would tend to be

more
FLESHY
or
SUCCULENT, at least close to the tuber.

Hope this helps.





Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
relative yield Ana Sabljo Plant Biology 0 17-04-2009 09:17 AM
Dioscorea batatas (hardy Yam) Victoria Clare United Kingdom 28 25-11-2003 02:14 PM
red clover grows whereever white clover grows P van Rijckevorsel Plant Science 7 04-08-2003 09:02 PM
New Zealand yam Dwayne United Kingdom 12 30-06-2003 04:22 PM
plant that grows from a relative of the Yam family? Vcoerulea Plant Biology 0 19-02-2003 01:36 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:21 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 GardenBanter.co.uk.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Gardening"

 

Copyright © 2017