VRIESEA FOSTERIANA revisited by Derek Butcher in J. Brom. Soc. 53: 133-6. 2003
In the Journal Brom Soc 49(6): 261. 1999 Chet Blackburn pointed out the problems with identification of the many forms of this species but little information has filtered through to the Registrar so that it can be captured for posterity.
In September 2002 I received some copies of protologues from difficult-to-find sources in Brazil, from Jason Grant. Amongst these was a Vriesia hasselbladi named in 1964 by Ruschi in Boletim do Museu de Biologia in Santa Teresa, Espirito Santo. This species does not appear anywhere in Flora Neotropica and I sent detail to Harry Luther for comment. It seems related to what was described by Reitz in 1965 as Vriesea fosteriana var. seideliana. Note that Vriesia hasselbladi is not in italics because I do not know if it was validly described. Some taxonomists say ‘Yes’ and some say ‘No’! This is now purely academic because any written material at the Biological Museum in Santa Teresa seems to have been destroyed in the floods of 1979. It was thought that living material could still be growing in the gardens there (albeit without a label!) but Elton Leme reports (April 2003) that this plant cannot be found there. This taxon comes from the area around Santa Teresa in Espirito Santo, Brazil which is the same area from which var. seideliana comes, but in this case the leaves are green with brown markings.
This variation in leaf colour got me wondering.
Vriesea fosteriana which if grown from self set seed will produce seedlings with different coloured leaves.
Vriesea fosteriana var. seideliana will also produce seedlings with different coloured leaves. In 1975 in Sellowia, Alvim Seidel reported that from one seed capsule he got 60% seedlings similar to the description but of the other 40% he could discern 8 main groups that differed to some degree from the description of the variety. It had been formally described by Reitz in 1965 but this variety did not appear in Flora Neotropica Monograph #14, Tillandsioideae, 1977 . Had it been investigated outside Brazil or just forgotten? It was only brought to notice in 1994 in the BSI Binomial listings without explanation. In DeRebus II 1997 there was comment “This is the cultivar ‘Red Chestnut’ common in horticulture”. However, the variety seideliana was originally described as only differing from the type by having leaves ‘flava’ ( pure yellow) or albo-flavescens (whitish –yellow) with ‘purpureis’ (dull red) transverse markings. This does not exactly equate with the ‘white’ portions usually associated horticulturally with this variety and neither does it equate with the colors usually associated with ‘Red Chestnut’.
This indicates to me that leaf colouration in Vriesea fosteriana varies considerably in the wild.
Therefore, I believe that botanically we should treat Vriesea fosteriana as having variable leaf patterns and drop the reference to any variety based purely on leaf colour. This should be investigated in the field and decisions made.
Now let us look at the forms in cultivation.
Luckily, the problem of variation in leaf coloration can be covered under the ICNCP (International code of Nomenclature of Cultivated Plants) rules. Just as there are many cultivar names for Aechmea fasciata so too will we have many for Vriesea fosteriana and the time may be right to try to rationalise some of these names. Anybody who has grown seed from this species or its cultivar ‘Red Chestnut’ will know there is a great variation in the seedlings which brings a gleam in the eye of the nurseryman.
‘Red Chestnut’ has had a chequered career. It was named by Eddie Waras, an expatriot Dane, in the late 1960’s when he sent a plant to Ervin Wurthmann. This collected plant (we do not know from where exactly in Brazil!) was more compact than the ‘normal’ species and had reddish-brown markings. Harry Luther remembers this clone as being not particularly robust and not as easy to grow as the species! At the same time a plant was sent to Hans Gulz in Germany. In the current BCR 1998 it is said to have reddish-brown markings on a creamy pale green background but where did this information come from? This cultivar first rated a mention in the JBS in 1973 p194 in an article by Ervin Wurthmann as a form of Vriesea fosteriana. ( Note. 9 years after variety seideliana was described but seideliana is not mentioned!) In fact there were quite a few mentions but nobody described it nor supplied a photo of this magnificent plant to the Registrar, nor referred to it as var. seideliana. The first we see it linked to the variety seideliana is in the BCR 1998 and no reference as to where the information came from. I can only assume the description was compiled from several contemporary publications such as The BSI ‘Handbook for Judges ‘ 1982 and Baensch’s ‘Blooming Bromeliads’ 1994 and advice from Harry Luther because of the comments in DeRebus II.
In the late 1970’s ‘Red Chestnut’ was imported to Australia from Germany (possibly Gulz). Clearly the size of the plant meant mass production in Europe would not be warranted and this may be why it found its way to Australia. One interesting point is that this German form seems to have a flatter, fatter leaf than the American counterpart which is more concave in shape!
From what I can gather, in the 1970’s this cultivar was rare and it seems to have been propagated in the USA in Florida by offset. We know that Dr. Morris Dexter got one offset! This was a slow process BUT it appears it was later grown from seed throughout the USA and Australia where all were called ‘Red Chestnut’ if they had reddish brown markings on the leaves. Anecdotal evidence suggests that even seedlings from Vriesea fosteriana suffered the same fate! There is, however, no suggestion that another species was involved in producing a possible hybrid.
Jeffrey Kent advises me that ‘Red Chestnut’ came to Kent’s Bromeliad nursery as seedlings from Gulz Seed raised plants grown in California under more controlled conditions than that in say, Brazil, showed very little variation other than in width of leaf or slight variation in lighter or darker leaves, and thousands were distributed.
So, although the name ‘Red Chestnut’ is not a cultivar name in the strict sense because plants are not all true offsets from the original imported by Wurthmann or Gulz, it will remain in the Register.
Now let us look at an almost parallel situation. In 1976 Alvim Seidel’s catalogue offered no ‘Red Chestnut’ plants (Waras and Seidel each had their own nurseries!) but did offer seed of Vriesea fosteriana, Vriesea fosteriana var. seideliana AND Vriesea fosteriana var seideliana ‘Rubra’. and this seed is still available when and if seed is set. Alvim Seidel advised me that the subvariety ‘Rubra’ had not been formally described but differed by having darker, reddish leaves where the transverse striations were less accentuated. We do not know what precautions are taken to ensure there is no accidental cross pollination or who has grown on this seed. We do know that a ‘Rubra Broadleaf’ was supplied to Kent’s Bromeliad Nursery by Seidel in these early days and it too has reproduced faithfully from seed except again for slight variations in leaf width and light and dark forms. So ‘Rubra Broadleaf’ and ‘Rubra’ are closely linked. We do know that var. seideliana was described in 1965 and Seidel would have had the seed on the market shortly afterwards. Could all the variations currently being experienced with Vriesea fosteriana be traced back to the seed offered from Brazil from this period?
We know that there was a Vriesea fosteriana ‘French Selection’ in Grande Magazine 1:1 1978 (frontispiece) and that Alvim Seidel alerted bromeliad growers (see Grande 1:2 p27) that this was in fact Vriesea fosteriana var ‘Seideliana’. This may have been expressed correctly in the original letter but the quote marks suggest a cultivar name was intended by the Editor. In any event, the fact that there was a Vriesea fosteriana var. seideliana did not become well known until the Fourth Binomial list in 1994.
We know that Kent’s Bromeliad Nursery in California grows many Vriesea fosteriana from seed and some have cultivar names. ‘Vista’ was selected from a batch of some 10,000 ‘Red Chestnut’ seedlings as having more white in its narrower leaves. This trait has continued in seed reproduction. Perhaps we will see more Cultivar names from this source in the future.
I have checked the Register and other sources for names of cultivars and here is a summation of the current situation. If you are aware of any others please let me know.
‘Bianca’ originating in the USA and in the ‘Trade’ but I know no details other than it seems to be like ‘Vista’. A photo taken in New Zealand is held and is on Register.
‘Big Red’ named in Brisbane, Australia by persons unknown but already being grown in New Zealand. It has bright red markings on the leaves. Photo held and on Register
‘Golden Legend’ named in New Zealand for golden leaves and brown markings. Photo held and on Register
‘Memoria Howard Yamamoto’ creamy pale green leaves with lavender-purple markings which are pink-violet when young. Photo held and on Register
‘Red Chestnut’ creamy pale green leaves with reddish-brown markings.Photo held and on Register
‘Rubra Broadleaf’ maroon colour leaves with reddish-brown markings (description from Tropiflora ) No photo held but on Register
‘Seidel’ white leaves with dull red transverse markings.(this would be in place of var. seideliana if considered necessary) Photo held and on Register
‘Seidel Red Leaf’ Reddish leaves darker than ‘Seidel’ with less accentuated transverse markings. Photo held and on Register.
‘Vista’ nearly white foliage with fine reddish-chocolate markings (description from Tropiflora). Photo held and on Register
Acknowledgement
I would like to thank all of those who helped me in this intriguing search including Helga Tarver, Ervin Wurthmann, Alvim Seidel, Jeffrey Kent, Oscar Ribeiro, John Catlan, Jason Grant, Elton Leme, and Harry Luther.
Grande Magazine 1978 Vriesea fosteriana ‘French Selection’ 1:1 frontispiece
Luther & Sieff 1994. An Alphabetical list of Bromeliad Binomials. Published by BSI, 4th edition
---------. 1997. De Rebus Bromeliacearum II. Selbyana 18(1).p122
Reitz 1965 Vriesea fosteriana var. seideliana Sellowia 17: p41
Ruschi 1964 Vriesia hasselbladi Bol. do Museu de Bio. 17: pp1-9.
Seidel 1975 Sementes de luma mesma inflorescencia de bromeliacea produzem muitos tipos de plantas diferentes. Sellowia 26: pp92-4
-------- 1978 ‘Letter to Editor’ Grande Magazine 1:2 p27
Wurthmann 1973. Bromeliad Spectacular. J. Brom. Soc.23(5): p194
Fulham
South Australia
Vriesea fosteriana Revisited Again. by Harry E. Luther & Karen F. Norton in J. Brom. Soc. 56(5): 208-9. 2006
One of the most attractive and much cultivated of the Brazilian Vrieseas are the highly patterned sorts of V. fosteriana. The cultivars of this species were treated a few years ago by Chet Blackburn (Blackburn 1999), and Derek Butcher (Butcher 2003). In his article Derek mentions another entity Vriesea hasselbladi.
Augusto Ruschi (Ruschi 1964) described Vriesea hasselbladi and compared it to both Vriesea wawranea and Vriesea fosteriana. Ruschi dedicates his new species to Dr. Victor and Erna Hasselblad, whom he had met at the Biology Museum the previous year. Ruschi probably should have used the specific epithet "Hasselbladiorum" as he meant to honor both visitors, but at any rate, the name appears to be a nomen nudum based on the ambiguity of the type numbers chosen, and the location of the type specimen. He mentions cultivated co-types in both Brazil and the USA (at the Fosters in Florida), but there seems to be no surviving material either alive or preserved.
All of this is mute, as Vriesea hasselbladi is clearly a more colorful version of Vriesea fosteriana, not a distinct and separate species. If a name for this taxon is needed at a subspecific level, Padre Rauleno Reitz (Reitz 1965) supplied one.
Vriesea fosteriana var. seideliana Reitz was based on material collected from the same area (Santa Teresa in Espirito Santo State) as Ruschi's collections, and was distinguished from the typical variety of Vriesea fosteriana by similar foliage color characters, (green leaves with purple markings on var. seideliana; white-green with brown-red markings on Vriesea hasselbladi). That the color, intensity, and pattern of the foliage can vary, has been thoroughly demonstrated by Alvim Seidel (Seidel 1975); the collector of variety seideliana; on his observations of a seed grown nursery population. The color illustration (Fig. 1) of a small nursery grouping at the Seidel establishment in 1983 confirms the variation of foliage characters.
So it seems clear that Vriesea hasselbladi and Vriesea fosteriana var. seideliana represent the same entity. It also appears that Vriesea hasselbladi cannot be considered validly published. The best name for the high contrast, brilliantly colored sorts of Vriesea fosteriana originally from the Santa Teresa region of Espirito Santo State, Brazil is Vriesea fosteriana var. seideliana; the less colorful, green marked with thin purple-red leaf type from Vargem Alta, Espirito Santo, is variety fosteriana.
The above is relevant for natural populations only. Material in cultivation has been highly selected, in some cases, line bred from at least 40 years. What you get in the nurseries probably requires a cultivar name, and is not covered by botanical nomenclature.
