*I made errors in this video:* The smaller form monstera tends to have LONGER node spacing than true Deliciosa. With regard to different leaf types: the species of the smaller leafed Monstera is HEAVILY debated (and honestly not settled). - Small form deliciosa-like was described in 1862 by Koch as Monstera borsigiana (the name most popularly used today, but not scientifically accepted) [1] - Then it was described in 1908 as a variety: Monstera deliciosa var. borsigiana (commonly used, but not scientifically accepted) [2] - Then in 1977, Michael Madison said "I consider it most useful to recognize M. deliciosa as a polymorphic species without separating its different forms as varieties"(p.97, [3]). All were now considered simply, Monstera Deliciosa. - Now, it Sept 2020, Fonseca et al. make a strong case for these smaller form Monstera deliciosa to actually be an ENTIRE DIFFERENT SPECIES, Monstera tacanaensis! These authors summarize as, "The names Monstera deliciosa var. borsigiana and M. borisigiana have been commonly used by horticulturalists for any relatively small M. deliciosa-like plant with relatively long and narrow internode, and smooth and unwinged petioles. At least some of these plants could be M. tacanaensis"(p. 62, [4]). Sources: [1] powo.science.kew.org/taxon/urn:lsid:ipni.org:names:87469-1 [2] wcsp.science.kew.org/nonacceptedRef.do?name_id=335536 [3] www.aroid.org/genera/monstera/Madison_Monstera_Rec.pdf [4] www.researchgate.net/publication/344377658_A_comparison_of_Monstera_deliciosa_and_M_tacanaensis_with_comments_on_Monstera_section_Tornelia_Araceae
All of these plants are borsigiana. They just differ in maturity. Node spacing is the easiest way to determine this. Large form Albo nodes looks similar to Thai Con nodes.Borsigiana nodes are spaced apart. Borsigiana can get quite large as they mature but not as large as large form which could get massive(think Thai Cons).
As another viewer correctly pointed out, all of these plants are actually Monstera deliciosa, and are of the variety, borsigiana. The two large Japanese varieties I have here are like my Thai constellation with similar nodes and leaves. The rest seem to be of the variety borsigiana
Yup, I agree they’re all Deliciosa. Just pointing out the difference between borsigiana and regular deliciosa. The internodes looks pretty spread out on your “large form deliciosa”, Thai’s are waay closer.
Check out the pinned comment at the top -- I just cleared this all up. It's very possible almost all OR even all of these plants are small form deliciosa-like. And it's possible they are Monstera tacanaensis: www.researchgate.net/publication/344377658_A_comparison_of_Monstera_deliciosa_and_M_tacanaensis_with_comments_on_Monstera_section_Tornelia_Araceae
Great informative video. It is always delightful watching these, as you keep things brief, clear, concise, to the point; without the annoying verbiage and awful "music." 😆
EDIT: You are correct. I made the change in the description. Larger form true Deliciosa tend to have very tight internodal spacing, whereas the smaller form M. tacanaensis / small form deliciosa-like plants tend to have longer internodal spacing.
Those albos all look like small form to me. Even that one with the big leaves is classic small form. Compared to large form, small forms leaves are longer than they are wide and the stems dont tend to get too thick compared to the large form. Its easier to tell the difference between the two when you have all mature versions of each but the difference is very obvious when you learn what to look out for, and its not necessarily the size of the leave but the shape
Do you have an email address? I have one of these… I’ve spoken to you in the past but I was wondering if there was a way that I could send pictures of my specimen so that I could find out exactly what it is? This would be so helpful to me as I’m propagating it now and will most likely sell a few here and there and I want to make sure that I’m labeling it correctly etc.
Hey Mary, see the pinned comment at the top. There's heavy debate in naming these plants! I am no authority in this area, just trying to use the best sources possible. This paper sheds light on differences in Monstera spp: www.researchgate.net/publication/344377658_A_comparison_of_Monstera_deliciosa_and_M_tacanaensis_with_comments_on_Monstera_section_Tornelia_Araceae
Normally I like your videos, but Borsigiana has not been a thing since the Madison revision in the 70s. Stop trying to make fetch happen, there certainly are not two types. I’ve had a variety of internodal spacing on my albos and some leaf shape, but they are the same plant.
The interesting thing is Albo deliciosa fetches MUCH higher dollar than Albo borsigiana(granted borsigiana is an incorrect name). There are certainly variances with Albo Monstera! I have about 300 different Albos right now exhibiting very different growth patterns. I've grown all green Deliciosa in these exact conditions and have had MASSIVE 3-4' leaves across (with winged petioles/heavy inner fenestrations); yet my small form deliciosa-like monsteras don't become large. The fairest classification is likely small form deliciosa. There's a strong argument that some of these are actually Monstera tacanaensis, check out this paper: www.researchgate.net/publication/344377658_A_comparison_of_Monstera_deliciosa_and_M_tacanaensis_with_comments_on_Monstera_section_Tornelia_Araceae
*I made errors in this video:* The smaller form monstera tends to have LONGER node spacing than true Deliciosa. With regard to different leaf types: the species of the smaller leafed Monstera is HEAVILY debated (and honestly not settled).
- Small form deliciosa-like was described in 1862 by Koch as Monstera borsigiana (the name most popularly used today, but not scientifically accepted) [1]
- Then it was described in 1908 as a variety: Monstera deliciosa var. borsigiana (commonly used, but not scientifically accepted) [2]
- Then in 1977, Michael Madison said "I consider it most useful to recognize M. deliciosa as a polymorphic species without separating its different forms as varieties"(p.97, [3]). All were now considered simply, Monstera Deliciosa.
- Now, it Sept 2020, Fonseca et al. make a strong case for these smaller form Monstera deliciosa to actually be an ENTIRE DIFFERENT SPECIES, Monstera tacanaensis! These authors summarize as, "The names Monstera deliciosa var. borsigiana and M. borisigiana have been commonly used by horticulturalists for any relatively small M. deliciosa-like plant with relatively long and narrow internode, and smooth and unwinged petioles. At least some of these plants could be M. tacanaensis"(p. 62, [4]).
Sources:
[1] powo.science.kew.org/taxon/urn:lsid:ipni.org:names:87469-1
[2] wcsp.science.kew.org/nonacceptedRef.do?name_id=335536
[3] www.aroid.org/genera/monstera/Madison_Monstera_Rec.pdf
[4] www.researchgate.net/publication/344377658_A_comparison_of_Monstera_deliciosa_and_M_tacanaensis_with_comments_on_Monstera_section_Tornelia_Araceae
Where can I buy one of your plants please
In Brazil we also discuss about deliciosa x borsigiana. Nice to know there is scientific research about it.
All of these plants are borsigiana. They just differ in maturity. Node spacing is the easiest way to determine this. Large form Albo nodes looks similar to Thai Con nodes.Borsigiana nodes are spaced apart. Borsigiana can get quite large as they mature but not as large as large form which could get massive(think Thai Cons).
As another viewer correctly pointed out, all of these plants are actually Monstera deliciosa, and are of the variety, borsigiana. The two large Japanese varieties I have here are like my Thai constellation with similar nodes and leaves. The rest seem to be of the variety borsigiana
Yup, I agree they’re all Deliciosa. Just pointing out the difference between borsigiana and regular deliciosa. The internodes looks pretty spread out on your “large form deliciosa”, Thai’s are waay closer.
Check out the pinned comment at the top -- I just cleared this all up. It's very possible almost all OR even all of these plants are small form deliciosa-like. And it's possible they are Monstera tacanaensis: www.researchgate.net/publication/344377658_A_comparison_of_Monstera_deliciosa_and_M_tacanaensis_with_comments_on_Monstera_section_Tornelia_Araceae
I was thinking the same thing....that the size of leaves and fenestration have to do with the maturity of the plant.
I think the difficulty in comparing them in that video is due to beeing all potted plants. I have both in soil and they are so different!
Great informative video. It is always delightful watching these, as you keep things brief, clear, concise, to the point; without the annoying verbiage and awful "music." 😆
Thanks Jack! 😄
How can I know difference between Japan vs Holand. Please.
Are you sure that large form has long distance between nodes? I think its relates to small form
. pls check and correct if needed.
EDIT: You are correct. I made the change in the description. Larger form true Deliciosa tend to have very tight internodal spacing, whereas the smaller form M. tacanaensis / small form deliciosa-like plants tend to have longer internodal spacing.
You Have Healthy Plants! 🌿🌿🌿👍
Thank you! 🤗
Awesome video! Very helpful 😊
😄
In my experience deliciosa albo have sectoral varigation not in marble form. All the marble form are borsigiana large and small form
Those albos all look like small form to me. Even that one with the big leaves is classic small form. Compared to large form, small forms leaves are longer than they are wide and the stems dont tend to get too thick compared to the large form. Its easier to tell the difference between the two when you have all mature versions of each but the difference is very obvious when you learn what to look out for, and its not necessarily the size of the leave but the shape
Do you have an email address? I have one of these… I’ve spoken to you in the past but I was wondering if there was a way that I could send pictures of my specimen so that I could find out exactly what it is? This would be so helpful to me as I’m propagating it now and will most likely sell a few here and there and I want to make sure that I’m labeling it correctly etc.
Yes! hello@prettyingreen.com
Hey Mary, see the pinned comment at the top. There's heavy debate in naming these plants! I am no authority in this area, just trying to use the best sources possible. This paper sheds light on differences in Monstera spp: www.researchgate.net/publication/344377658_A_comparison_of_Monstera_deliciosa_and_M_tacanaensis_with_comments_on_Monstera_section_Tornelia_Araceae
Normally I like your videos, but Borsigiana has not been a thing since the Madison revision in the 70s. Stop trying to make fetch happen, there certainly are not two types. I’ve had a variety of internodal spacing on my albos and some leaf shape, but they are the same plant.
It just sounds like a video to back up the ridiculous labels that they sell under on Etsy to pretend they’re different plants. 💀
Hey Travis, please see the pinned comment at the top
@@prettyingreen okay, but let the name die out instead of perpetuating multiple types of small form deliciosa.
The interesting thing is Albo deliciosa fetches MUCH higher dollar than Albo borsigiana(granted borsigiana is an incorrect name). There are certainly variances with Albo Monstera! I have about 300 different Albos right now exhibiting very different growth patterns. I've grown all green Deliciosa in these exact conditions and have had MASSIVE 3-4' leaves across (with winged petioles/heavy inner fenestrations); yet my small form deliciosa-like monsteras don't become large. The fairest classification is likely small form deliciosa. There's a strong argument that some of these are actually Monstera tacanaensis, check out this paper: www.researchgate.net/publication/344377658_A_comparison_of_Monstera_deliciosa_and_M_tacanaensis_with_comments_on_Monstera_section_Tornelia_Araceae
is that your basement?
It’s actually our commercial greenhouse in Los Angeles 😄