Tetrapanax papyrifer 101010-0604
Botanic Gardens, Sydney
In a bed with a number of other Araliaceous shrubs, new introductions planted about 20-25 years ago. This is somewhat different from the Tetrapanax grown for many years as a garden plant in Sydney (and often run wild, though not from seed). The leaf lobes are deeper and narrower and the leaf indumentum seems a little more felty. It's a more handsome plant.
But all my references say that this is a genus of a single species.
[note on spelling: the most recent version of the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature has clarified some rules of grammatical gender. The rule that applies here is "Compounds ending in -botrys, -codon, -myces, -odon, -panax, -pogon, -stemon, and other masculine words, are masculine." The specific epithet should be in agreement, in this case papyrifer (masc.) as opposed to papyrifera (fem.)]
Tetrapanax papyrifer 101010-0604
Botanic Gardens, Sydney
In a bed with a number of other Araliaceous shrubs, new introductions planted about 20-25 years ago. This is somewhat different from the Tetrapanax grown for many years as a garden plant in Sydney (and often run wild, though not from seed). The leaf lobes are deeper and narrower and the leaf indumentum seems a little more felty. It's a more handsome plant.
But all my references say that this is a genus of a single species.
[note on spelling: the most recent version of the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature has clarified some rules of grammatical gender. The rule that applies here is "Compounds ending in -botrys, -codon, -myces, -odon, -panax, -pogon, -stemon, and other masculine words, are masculine." The specific epithet should be in agreement, in this case papyrifer (masc.) as opposed to papyrifera (fem.)]