Not boring at all. Very informative and well articulated. The large form and the small form are very different. I wasn't aware that the small form was no longer called borsagiana. Thanks for the time and effort you put in to researching this!
Great job, Chris! I thoroughly enjoyed this video and I appreciate the time you spent researching this topic. I look forward to seeing your videos each week!
I have a regular green monstera I got from Home Depot. It has about 5 separate plants in the pot, I know because I repotted it to put a pole in the middle and tied all the individual plants around. They were the same size to start but now one of them is significantly bigger than the rest and has a big stem with the bumps and has put out 3 huge leaves with the holes and the ruffles along the petiole, meanwhile the rest of the plants are still small. I'm starting to think I have one large plant in with a bunch of small ones.
i am very convinced we have a few clades all mixed up, monstera being one ( of the biggest misunderstood), some epipiremnums too. there's another problem that add re-enforcements to confusions and that's big box stores giving weird out of the ordinary common names to try and score a quick buck tricking people its something crazy different(greed infuriates me) but in reality common names is just that and not a scientific name and companies like costa farms are insanely guilty of this. i hate costa farms with a passion! "hi! my name is 'house plant" for an annoying example. that ADDS to the already messed up situations. we need more people like pretty in green. this is one of my favorite channels to watch. also techplant can kick rocks, people like that dudes not helping either.
@@jhndr0nia either way, i still stand by things being a bit mixed up, and he never said in the video that it IS for certain, he said he SUGGESTS, meaning take it with a grain of salt. if anything hes going in depth repeating thoughts many others have with that plant in particular having growth and differences. not really being mean at all twords you but we will just have to wait and see regardless EVEN if he understood it or not. pretty in green is STILL a good channel to watch.
Thank you for doing this video- it helps me understand why some have those huge leaves with major fenestrations. The nursery just sell them as monster deliciosa and tell you the leaves will get huge with age and more light. I have older healthy ones but they never truly get monstera deliciosa big leaf form.
You’re welcome! Yes I feel like they all must be technically sold as Monstera deliciosa, but there is a clear difference when you see them grown in the same light-they are different plants! 😅
I thought this was a thoughtful and well researched video. My only comment is that throughout the video you refer to the differences in appearance and 'therefore' they are different species. The obvious difference in appearance or structure does not in itself render them different species. Really gene analysis is needed to help get closer to verifying that.
Hey! Thank you for the feedback! I agree genetic testing is really the only way to tell differences between species. As you correctly point out, I am simply using my anecdotal evidence of raising a variety of Monstera deliciosa albo variegata to determine the differences. But that does not make them different species 😄 Until they are recognized by the scientific world… everything is Monstera deliciosa 😅
Most of my friends just think it's a swiss chesse plant 😂 Fabulous video and incredible job researching. I love understanding things in depth, and spent a ton of time trying to research what to officially call an albo cutting when doing a treasure hunt for my friend ... with her first cutting at the end (and there were so many conflicting names)! I'm sorry about people being butts in their comments. I know the internet brings anonymity, it's rough when people take it to extremes. Plus, borsigiana is just so fun to say...
Really appreciate the kind words! I’m glad this shed some light. There is still so much conflicting opinion on Monstera deliciosa types, and I wish borsigiana was the acceptable name bc it is so fun to say 😆 And there’s definitely a spectrum of different Monstera Albos out there!
@@prettyingreen I saw this series of videos and these plants to me look like Monstera Deliciosa Albo. Or... a Large Form Albo... What do you think? Here's one of the videos and it opens with the plant I'm talking about: th-cam.com/video/1dXehBW3ftE/w-d-xo.html
My borsigiana growing in aquaponic is starting to look like a deliciosa. I'm starting to reconsider which I have. Its a science experiment 😅. How many leaves does it take for ripple to usually show? The main node is slightly getting thicker.
It’s usually 2-3 years I would say (from seed) in the ideal conditions. It’s possibly a deliciosa if it gets big enough! Maybe 7-8 leaves in high light should produce large leaves with tight internodal spacing
@@prettyingreen Wow that is great to hear, I will definitely get one someday. And if you are here still, I kindly wanna ask you a question. I got a monstera also top cutting with two leaves, a node and an aerial root. It suffered from root rot and I had to cut node and aerial root. But between the two leaves, there is something looks like a node. Is there any possibility it is a node and it is gone grow to a full plant?
Base on this video it is suggesting not to call it "borsigiana" as if the name never exist (small version), who is in charge of these names, how can we officially say which name is which? Love these kind of vids though.
We have a monstera like plant whose leaves,penetration and fruit are exactly monstera deliciousa but it grows only on water and got spikes on leaves and steam 🤔
The issue here is, how many wild individuals are you comparing? Two or three out of millions of wild individuals? It's an extremely limited view of the actual situation. There is a very good article online that clears this argument up quite well. I can't post a link here because TH-cam will delete the comment, but to read it, you can search "tradescantia hub What is Monstera borsigiana." It nicely sums up the arguments used to justify the existence of "borsigiana": --- But these plants look different! People use lots of different traits to distinguish “borsigiana” from “true” M. deliciosa. Stem thickness Leaf size Amount and type of fenestration (splits and holes) in the leaves Presence or absence of ruffles on the edge of the petiole (leaf stalk) Length of stem between leaves Overall shape of the leaf outline All of these variations can ultimately be explained by the fact that M. deliciosa as a species has a huge amount of natural diversity. That diversity is expressed in two ways: within the lifetime of an individual plant, and between different individual plants. --- So, the issue is horticultural, not botanical. What we most likely have is plants derived from two (probably more actually) different wild individuals, one with a certain set of characteristics and another with a different set. And a variation does not a species (or even a subspecies or variety) make. One might argue that they are two different "cultivars," but for a cultivar to be recognized, there needs to be an actual record of the original plant and a record of propagation from that particular individual. Even though most Monstera is vegetatively propagated, the actual lineages of what is in cultivation is likely much more complex. So while some plants may fit the description of deliciosa, and others may conform more to the description of "borsigiana," the name borsigiana means nothing botanically. Add to this that the original plant described by Koch as borsigiana was being grown in cultivation in Germany, very different conditions from the wild plant with which it was being compared. Consider how different a cactus in cultivation looks from the same species in the wild, and how absurd it would be to classify one as a variety or different species because of those differences!
To offer a possible parallel, consider wild apples in their native forest in Kazakhstan. You find tall trees, short trees, trees with large leaves, trees with small leaves, trees with bitter black fruits, trees with tasteless pale brown fruits, some with tasty red ones. They are all the exact same species. Now imagine if two or three varieties were brought to the west and botanists, based on the limited material they had, decided to classify them. It might seem completely logical to classify them as different varieties, or even different species. But it would be wrong. Just as basing a botanical classification on plants that had been cultivated (presumably from a particular selection) in one particular area would be wrong.
@@prettyingreen I'm not a taxonomist but as a person who breeds plants and works with some species that are remarkably diverse over different regions (Pinguicula moranensis, P. laueana, etc.) I'm constantly being made aware of what a limited view we we often have as horticulturists. We get a regional variant of a species from a particular area and usually get the idea that "P. x from x region looks like x." But it's easy to forget that that is just one person's collection from one very localized population that that person chose, probably because it stood out to them in some way. Larger flowers, brighter color, unusual leaves. If you want to dive down an interesting rabbit hole, Google: Pinguicula moranensis Pinguicula moranensis A Pinguicula moranensis J Pinguicula ANPA C Pinguicula ANPA D Pinguicula 'Huahuapan' Pinguicula potosiensis Pinguicula 'Tehuacan' Pinguicula 'Libelulita' There are lots more I won't bore you with but they are all actually the same species. Even the "ANPA" ones are two out of four collected by one person, and they're all different! There's so much more diversity out there than we realize.
To me, those differences still matter and need to be labeled as a different size in some way. We lable plants dwarf vs standard. We lable the same dog breed miniature, standard, or giant. Being the same more or less genetically does not help us when it comes to the function. Some Monstera are always large and so are their offspring. Some are always small and so are their offering. We need to liable that so people know. Especially now that we are breeding them that way. As in, breeding big to big generation after generation or small to small. Eventually it doesn't matter what happens in the wild. It matters how we are breeding/cloning them. In the reptile hobby a animal cam be genetically identical, but if their is a massive size difference it is labeled as such ( for example there is a snake that looks the same on the mainland vs the island, but the island ones never get bigger. So the island ones are labeled dwarfs. Even in captivity off the island they stay small. It's called island syndrome in some circles). My point is, why they are smaller or bigger isn't really relevant to me as a buyer. The fact there are differences is. I need to know if I am buying a large of small form just like I need to know if I am buying a miniature or standard poodle.
ok then so what is tauerii? ever heard of it? there only seems to be one paragraph written about it and then it gets recycled and reworded by ai. basically says that "Tauerii is a dwarf-type Monstera and particularly develops its leaf perforations early." i got some deliciosas (like 8 or 9 in a pot, all clearly grown from seed) at a big box store and they were actually labelled "taveril" like someone's handwriting was so bad at some point that tauerii became taveril and it made it all the way to the plant tag anyway so now i call em taverils and laugh
Do you know what would cause an Aurea to be putting out only HALF a leaf? The propergations are in good conditions….i’m baffled! Unless the leaves to follow will be correct!
@@prettyingreen It’s baffling to me… the last large leaf that unfurled prior to my propergating has some of the of the leaf missing, it’s a half moon with half of a half missing, nice variegation tho. and now two separate props have their first leaves the same way. Maybe I should be fertilizing? I don’t know….i’m so sad tho
Over all a lot of information condensed in a short video. But I think you you really missed the mark with this video because you misunderstood many information from the publicaton. Monstera tacanaensis is now considered a distant species and some of the specimens that had previously been identified as Monstera deliciosa var. borsigiana are in fact M. tacanaensis. However, this doesn't mean that all small rather vining plants belong to this species. Therefore M. tacanaensis is NOT the same as M. deliciosa var. borsigiana. As the authors concluded, Monstera deliciosa stays a very diverse species even now that M. tacanaensis was excluded. But since they did not really comment on the identity of Monstera deliciosa var. borsigiana (they only mentioned that it probably makes sense to continue using this name in horticulture), I really don't understand why you would use this publication to discuss the small form and even use it as an argument that there are clear differences, in my opinion this just adds to the confusion. It is also not "scientifically wrong" to use the term Monstera (deliciosa var.) borsigiana, it is just not accepted by the majority of authorities. Additional things that caught my attention is that you showed the type specimen for the Sierrana variation in the beginning. Also Koch naming the plant Monstera borsigiana implies this smaller variation to be a distinct species.
It’s a funny to me that in pursuit being scientific accurate, we start to use less scientifically accurate term like “small form” and “large form”. Language is a tool for us to communicate better. Taxonomy is a tool for us to communication better. Right now we are too caught up in the syntaxes and it’s not good. I read the same paper referred the in video, and I think your interpretation is not entirely accurate. It could be that the origin specimen of borsigiana is the same plant as tacanaensis. But our modern usage of “borsigiana” refers to a plant that that distinctly different than tacanaensis. Moreover, different branch of science care about different things. The authors as botanists don’t really care how we grow plant at home. They do not need specific names to discuss the differences between the large form or small form of deliciosa, They have more specific language to do that. We as horticulturalists, amateur or not, do care, and the authors of the paper recognize the horticultural importance of separating those two. I think that worth noting here. Ultimately, we the fact we are stuck the nomenclature of “small form” vs “large form” is a reflection of the usefulness of a polyphyletic grouping different phenotypes of Monstera deliciosa.
Screw the narrow-minded people who get their asses on their shoulders about taxonomic classification of these plants. How many plants have just been reclassified recently, after being called the wrong thing for decades, maybe even centuries??? Keep an open mind, and don't let the haters affect your thinking. Borsigiana could still be very different than Tacanaensis. Just because someone made some decent points about them, doesn't mean it's the end-all be-all of the classification, or the final word on it. I will stick to Borsigiana and Deliciosa until something MORE DEFINITE is presented and accepted by the larger portion of the scientific community. Cheers!
Ahhh I see you’ve found that video!! I completely agree with you. The difference in person with these plants is OBVIOUS, but you can’t call them that bc the plant police will come get you 🚨🚨🚨🤣
I have a true Borsigiana… been in my family since the 70s. I have propagated thousands cuttings. Borsigiana does not get holes, it will only get the splits. It doesn’t have the wavy stuff on the leaf stem and it has absolutely no veriegation. Nodes spacing will not get shorter than 4 inch under full light. I hate that people call it a “small form”…it’s a sub species it should be called Borsigiana!
Come to The Albo Show! prettyingreen.com/blogs/news/the-albo-show
Very interesting. It's surprising how so many people of high education didn't notice or ignored the petioles and the different lobe counts.
I love these videos talking about the history of plants. Please do more of them!
I will!! Thank you for the kind words 😄
you are aabsolutely right. I thought mine was a Deliciosa but it is Borsigiana. Just easier to say, and both beautiful plants to have!
Not boring at all. Very informative and well articulated. The large form and the small form are very different. I wasn't aware that the small form was no longer called borsagiana. Thanks for the time and effort you put in to researching this!
Thank you for the kind words, and for checking out the video! 😄
I just purchased an albino deliciosa var borsiagna or whatever and I was thoroughly confused so thank you.
Great job, Chris! I thoroughly enjoyed this video and I appreciate the time you spent researching this topic. I look forward to seeing your videos each week!
Thank you, Michell!! Appreciate you watching! 😄
I have a regular green monstera I got from Home Depot. It has about 5 separate plants in the pot, I know because I repotted it to put a pole in the middle and tied all the individual plants around. They were the same size to start but now one of them is significantly bigger than the rest and has a big stem with the bumps and has put out 3 huge leaves with the holes and the ruffles along the petiole, meanwhile the rest of the plants are still small. I'm starting to think I have one large plant in with a bunch of small ones.
Thank you for this clarification. You've done good work here to help us understand and care for these lovely plants. All the best to you and yours!
Awww thank you for the kind words!! It means a lot! 😄
Love all the research you’ve done. Super cool !!!! 🙋♀️🙂
Thank you for watching the vid Erika!! 🤗
i am very convinced we have a few clades all mixed up, monstera being one ( of the biggest misunderstood), some epipiremnums too. there's another problem that add re-enforcements to confusions and that's big box stores giving weird out of the ordinary common names to try and score a quick buck tricking people its something crazy different(greed infuriates me) but in reality common names is just that and not a scientific name and companies like costa farms are insanely guilty of this. i hate costa farms with a passion! "hi! my name is 'house plant" for an annoying example. that ADDS to the already messed up situations. we need more people like pretty in green. this is one of my favorite channels to watch. also techplant can kick rocks, people like that dudes not helping either.
He misunderstood the paper and now is spreading his "interpretation" alongside misconceptions. He is definitely contributing to the chaos
@@jhndr0nia either way, i still stand by things being a bit mixed up, and he never said in the video that it IS for certain, he said he SUGGESTS, meaning take it with a grain of salt. if anything hes going in depth repeating thoughts many others have with that plant in particular having growth and differences. not really being mean at all twords you but we will just have to wait and see regardless EVEN if he understood it or not. pretty in green is STILL a good channel to watch.
Great video, Chris! Just wondering if you’ve came across any Albo Deliciosa before? As in the large form with the Albo variegation
Great video thanks for sharing
Thank you for doing this video- it helps me understand why some have those huge leaves with major fenestrations. The nursery just sell them as monster deliciosa and tell you the leaves will get huge with age and more light. I have older healthy ones but they never truly get monstera deliciosa big leaf form.
You’re welcome! Yes I feel like they all must be technically sold as Monstera deliciosa, but there is a clear difference when you see them grown in the same light-they are different plants! 😅
Good job, I really learned a lot.
Thanks for the info. Very interesting. I remember in the 80’s and 90’s it was called “Mexican bread fruit” as a common name
Yes, that's it! Still commonly called that as the fruit is consumed through central and south america under this name!
Hey! Could you tell something about the monstera deliciosa "tauerii"? Is this again only a new name for the small form? Thx in regard! 😊
I thought this was a thoughtful and well researched video. My only comment is that throughout the video you refer to the differences in appearance and 'therefore' they are different species. The obvious difference in appearance or structure does not in itself render them different species. Really gene analysis is needed to help get closer to verifying that.
Hey! Thank you for the feedback! I agree genetic testing is really the only way to tell differences between species. As you correctly point out, I am simply using my anecdotal evidence of raising a variety of Monstera deliciosa albo variegata to determine the differences. But that does not make them different species 😄 Until they are recognized by the scientific world… everything is Monstera deliciosa 😅
Nice work!!
😄
Great info distilled for us
Glad it was helpful!
Most of my friends just think it's a swiss chesse plant 😂 Fabulous video and incredible job researching. I love understanding things in depth, and spent a ton of time trying to research what to officially call an albo cutting when doing a treasure hunt for my friend ... with her first cutting at the end (and there were so many conflicting names)! I'm sorry about people being butts in their comments. I know the internet brings anonymity, it's rough when people take it to extremes. Plus, borsigiana is just so fun to say...
Really appreciate the kind words! I’m glad this shed some light. There is still so much conflicting opinion on Monstera deliciosa types, and I wish borsigiana was the acceptable name bc it is so fun to say 😆 And there’s definitely a spectrum of different Monstera Albos out there!
So Thai con is big form and the other variegated ones are large? What about the aurea?
Thank you for making this video. Super interesting.
Absolutely! So glad you enjoyed it!
@@prettyingreen I saw this series of videos and these plants to me look like Monstera Deliciosa Albo. Or... a Large Form Albo... What do you think? Here's one of the videos and it opens with the plant I'm talking about: th-cam.com/video/1dXehBW3ftE/w-d-xo.html
I never saw a Borsigiana (or Tacanaensis) this big
My borsigiana growing in aquaponic is starting to look like a deliciosa. I'm starting to reconsider which I have. Its a science experiment 😅. How many leaves does it take for ripple to usually show? The main node is slightly getting thicker.
It’s usually 2-3 years I would say (from seed) in the ideal conditions. It’s possibly a deliciosa if it gets big enough! Maybe 7-8 leaves in high light should produce large leaves with tight internodal spacing
Species should be typed/written in lower case.
I loved the history lesson ❤ would love to see more like this. Maybe on the transcantia being a dracena now 🤔
Where did you get that info from? That's absolutely untrue. They don't even belong to the same family, that wouldn't happen
Are all albos borsigiana/tacanaensis, or is there such thing as true deliciosa albos?
Revisiting this video. Did you ever receive any comments back?
As I learned from your video, I have never seen a deliciosa albo, is there any?
Yes! There are. My last 2 videos I show our White Tiger Albo Monstera, which is deliciosa!! Huge leaves and inner fenestrations
@@prettyingreen Wow that is great to hear, I will definitely get one someday. And if you are here still, I kindly wanna ask you a question. I got a monstera also top cutting with two leaves, a node and an aerial root. It suffered from root rot and I had to cut node and aerial root. But between the two leaves, there is something looks like a node. Is there any possibility it is a node and it is gone grow to a full plant?
Base on this video it is suggesting not to call it "borsigiana" as if the name never exist (small version), who is in charge of these names, how can we officially say which name is which? Love these kind of vids though.
We have to acknowledge that there’s smaller and larger form monstera deliciosa… people just get mad when we call it borsigiana
We have a monstera like plant whose leaves,penetration and fruit are exactly monstera deliciousa but it grows only on water and got spikes on leaves and steam 🤔
Hmmm interesting. I’ve never heard of that! Which region of the world does it grow?
The issue here is, how many wild individuals are you comparing? Two or three out of millions of wild individuals? It's an extremely limited view of the actual situation.
There is a very good article online that clears this argument up quite well. I can't post a link here because TH-cam will delete the comment, but to read it, you can search "tradescantia hub What is Monstera borsigiana."
It nicely sums up the arguments used to justify the existence of "borsigiana":
---
But these plants look different!
People use lots of different traits to distinguish “borsigiana” from “true” M. deliciosa.
Stem thickness
Leaf size
Amount and type of fenestration (splits and holes) in the leaves
Presence or absence of ruffles on the edge of the petiole (leaf stalk)
Length of stem between leaves
Overall shape of the leaf outline
All of these variations can ultimately be explained by the fact that M. deliciosa as a species has a huge amount of natural diversity. That diversity is expressed in two ways: within the lifetime of an individual plant, and between different individual plants.
---
So, the issue is horticultural, not botanical. What we most likely have is plants derived from two (probably more actually) different wild individuals, one with a certain set of characteristics and another with a different set. And a variation does not a species (or even a subspecies or variety) make.
One might argue that they are two different "cultivars," but for a cultivar to be recognized, there needs to be an actual record of the original plant and a record of propagation from that particular individual.
Even though most Monstera is vegetatively propagated, the actual lineages of what is in cultivation is likely much more complex. So while some plants may fit the description of deliciosa, and others may conform more to the description of "borsigiana," the name borsigiana means nothing botanically.
Add to this that the original plant described by Koch as borsigiana was being grown in cultivation in Germany, very different conditions from the wild plant with which it was being compared. Consider how different a cactus in cultivation looks from the same species in the wild, and how absurd it would be to classify one as a variety or different species because of those differences!
To offer a possible parallel, consider wild apples in their native forest in Kazakhstan. You find tall trees, short trees, trees with large leaves, trees with small leaves, trees with bitter black fruits, trees with tasteless pale brown fruits, some with tasty red ones. They are all the exact same species.
Now imagine if two or three varieties were brought to the west and botanists, based on the limited material they had, decided to classify them. It might seem completely logical to classify them as different varieties, or even different species.
But it would be wrong. Just as basing a botanical classification on plants that had been cultivated (presumably from a particular selection) in one particular area would be wrong.
Appreciate this! Lots of great info here 👍
@@prettyingreen I'm not a taxonomist but as a person who breeds plants and works with some species that are remarkably diverse over different regions (Pinguicula moranensis, P. laueana, etc.) I'm constantly being made aware of what a limited view we we often have as horticulturists. We get a regional variant of a species from a particular area and usually get the idea that "P. x from x region looks like x." But it's easy to forget that that is just one person's collection from one very localized population that that person chose, probably because it stood out to them in some way. Larger flowers, brighter color, unusual leaves. If you want to dive down an interesting rabbit hole, Google:
Pinguicula moranensis
Pinguicula moranensis A
Pinguicula moranensis J
Pinguicula ANPA C
Pinguicula ANPA D
Pinguicula 'Huahuapan'
Pinguicula potosiensis
Pinguicula 'Tehuacan'
Pinguicula 'Libelulita'
There are lots more I won't bore you with but they are all actually the same species. Even the "ANPA" ones are two out of four collected by one person, and they're all different!
There's so much more diversity out there than we realize.
To me, those differences still matter and need to be labeled as a different size in some way. We lable plants dwarf vs standard. We lable the same dog breed miniature, standard, or giant. Being the same more or less genetically does not help us when it comes to the function. Some Monstera are always large and so are their offspring. Some are always small and so are their offering. We need to liable that so people know. Especially now that we are breeding them that way. As in, breeding big to big generation after generation or small to small. Eventually it doesn't matter what happens in the wild. It matters how we are breeding/cloning them. In the reptile hobby a animal cam be genetically identical, but if their is a massive size difference it is labeled as such ( for example there is a snake that looks the same on the mainland vs the island, but the island ones never get bigger. So the island ones are labeled dwarfs. Even in captivity off the island they stay small. It's called island syndrome in some circles). My point is, why they are smaller or bigger isn't really relevant to me as a buyer. The fact there are differences is. I need to know if I am buying a large of small form just like I need to know if I am buying a miniature or standard poodle.
ok then so what is tauerii? ever heard of it? there only seems to be one paragraph written about it and then it gets recycled and reworded by ai. basically says that "Tauerii is a dwarf-type Monstera and particularly develops its leaf perforations early."
i got some deliciosas (like 8 or 9 in a pot, all clearly grown from seed) at a big box store and they were actually labelled "taveril" like someone's handwriting was so bad at some point that tauerii became taveril and it made it all the way to the plant tag
anyway so now i call em taverils and laugh
Do you know what would cause an Aurea to be putting out only HALF a leaf? The propergations are in good conditions….i’m baffled! Unless the leaves to follow will be correct!
That usually only happens if the leaf was cut beforehand (within the sleeve) and then comes out cut / deformed. That’s odd!
@@prettyingreen It’s baffling to me… the last large leaf that unfurled prior to my propergating has some of the of the leaf missing, it’s a half moon with half of a half missing, nice variegation tho. and now two separate props have their first leaves the same way. Maybe I should be fertilizing? I don’t know….i’m so sad tho
As I do my research…..I hope it’s not Mosaic Virus
Are you fertilizing now?
It’s rarely Mosaic, but it is possible!
Over all a lot of information condensed in a short video. But I think you you really missed the mark with this video because you misunderstood many information from the publicaton.
Monstera tacanaensis is now considered a distant species and some of the specimens that had previously been identified as Monstera deliciosa var. borsigiana are in fact M. tacanaensis. However, this doesn't mean that all small rather vining plants belong to this species. Therefore M. tacanaensis is NOT the same as M. deliciosa var. borsigiana.
As the authors concluded, Monstera deliciosa stays a very diverse species even now that M. tacanaensis was excluded.
But since they did not really comment on the identity of Monstera deliciosa var. borsigiana (they only mentioned that it probably makes sense to continue using this name in horticulture), I really don't understand why you would use this publication to discuss the small form and even use it as an argument that there are clear differences, in my opinion this just adds to the confusion. It is also not "scientifically wrong" to use the term Monstera (deliciosa var.) borsigiana, it is just not accepted by the majority of authorities.
Additional things that caught my attention is that you showed the type specimen for the Sierrana variation in the beginning.
Also Koch naming the plant Monstera borsigiana implies this smaller variation to be a distinct species.
pet·i·ole
I have been told I have borsigigna
And then I been told doesn't exist
I love to know
The name isn’t accepted, but the various forms certainly exist!
It’s a funny to me that in pursuit being scientific accurate, we start to use less scientifically accurate term like “small form” and “large form”.
Language is a tool for us to communicate better. Taxonomy is a tool for us to communication better. Right now we are too caught up in the syntaxes and it’s not good.
I read the same paper referred the in video, and I think your interpretation is not entirely accurate. It could be that the origin specimen of borsigiana is the same plant as tacanaensis. But our modern usage of “borsigiana” refers to a plant that that distinctly different than tacanaensis.
Moreover, different branch of science care about different things. The authors as botanists don’t really care how we grow plant at home. They do not need specific names to discuss the differences between the large form or small form of deliciosa, They have more specific language to do that.
We as horticulturalists, amateur or not, do care, and the authors of the paper recognize the horticultural importance of separating those two. I think that worth noting here.
Ultimately, we the fact we are stuck the nomenclature of “small form” vs “large form” is a reflection of the usefulness of a polyphyletic grouping different phenotypes of Monstera deliciosa.
couldn't agree more!
Screw the narrow-minded people who get their asses on their shoulders about taxonomic classification of these plants. How many plants have just been reclassified recently, after being called the wrong thing for decades, maybe even centuries??? Keep an open mind, and don't let the haters affect your thinking. Borsigiana could still be very different than Tacanaensis. Just because someone made some decent points about them, doesn't mean it's the end-all be-all of the classification, or the final word on it. I will stick to Borsigiana and Deliciosa until something MORE DEFINITE is presented and accepted by the larger portion of the scientific community. Cheers!
Ahhh I see you’ve found that video!! I completely agree with you. The difference in person with these plants is OBVIOUS, but you can’t call them that bc the plant police will come get you 🚨🚨🚨🤣
I have a true Borsigiana… been in my family since the 70s. I have propagated thousands cuttings. Borsigiana does not get holes, it will only get the splits. It doesn’t have the wavy stuff on the leaf stem and it has absolutely no veriegation. Nodes spacing will not get shorter than 4 inch under full light. I hate that people call it a “small form”…it’s a sub species it should be called Borsigiana!
I couldn’t agree more!! It’s a completely different plant!! Cool story 🙌
Borsigiana get's holes
The way you say “Petiole” hurts my ears. I’m sorry lol.