# Is this some sort of bromeliad?



## Tim Benzedrine (Aug 15, 2012)

If it is, somebody should tell it it isn't supposed to be here, it's several hundred miles too far north, according to the range info I looked up online.
 I was playing with my new camera (thus the poor quality) and thought I was just taking an experimental picture of a few ferns growing on an outcrop. Upon transferring pictures to my PC. I was surprised to see this mystery plant. Any thoughts?
 I am going to go examine it more closely tomorrow, I think.


----------



## catfishrod69 (Aug 15, 2012)

Looks like a normal daylily to me. These usually have orange flowers, and are found in alot of places.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Tim Benzedrine (Aug 15, 2012)

Hmm. It could be, I guess. I thought it looked like it had the rosette "cup" that many bromeliads possess, but keep in mind that I didn't even notice the plant when I took the picture, so the photo is all I'm going by. There are plenty of those day-lilies here, so you are probably right. The leaves seem a lot darker and wider than the local lilies, but that could just be a result of the growing conditions. I'll look into it further, but my money is on your suggestion as it makes a lot more sense. Thanks for the input and I'll post again if I learn anything more.


----------



## Tarac (Aug 16, 2012)

catfishrod69 said:


> Looks like a normal daylily to me. These usually have orange flowers, and are found in alot of places.


Not a daylily, they are parallel ranked leaves not a rosette.  Daylilies also have involute leaf blades, these are flat with no obvious midvein.  Looks like a monocot to me in this pic.  Could be a Bromeliad, where exactly are you?  On the bank it could easily be something that washed down from a cultivated patch.  There are "hardy" bromeliads depending on how far north you are- Bromelia, Billbergia, some Neoregalia, just depends on how cold you get.  A lot of those have species that will grow outdoors along the Gulf coast where we do experience predictable freezes.  Could also be a Dracaena sp.  Not enough info to make a good guess yet IMO.  I have great plant resources though, if you get a good pic and a locality I can likely get you an ID at least to the generic level.

My guess, especially because it is on an slope where things would slide/wash out to, is that it is something that escaped from cultivation during inclement weather.  Happens a lot around here, most often with Crinum cultivars and other bulbous plants but also quite a few Bromeliads.  I have a good number of free escaped plants that I got from combing creek embankments with my dog.


----------



## Tim Benzedrine (Aug 16, 2012)

Well, I went back and snapped a few more. I got the best I could, mostly by zooming, but I climbed the hazardous bank to take one. I was a bit leery about balancing on the steep hill with a brand new -and rather expensive by my standards- camera, so I made it quick. As you may notice, there are several, so I may just uproot one and bring the specimen home to photograph. I'm getting a bit skeptical of my identification now and beginning to wonder if it isn't simply a kind of grass.

I will point out that the site is downhill from a cemetery, only 30 or 40 yards away if that far, so it is entirely possible that something non-native could end up there, from perhaps a live-planter arrangement placed on a grave.  But I'm leaning towards a much more mundane plant now. Here are a few more pictures, the best I could get, given the terrain and lighting. There isn't much for scale, but my fingers appear in the first photo, which may help a little. If these shed no light on the matter, I will go without the camera, climb the embankment and uproot one for closer examination and photographing. But I feel I've probably made much ado about nothing, it's probably some local weed. Thanks everybody, for the assist!


----------



## Tarac (Aug 17, 2012)

Chlorophytum comosum


----------



## Tim Benzedrine (Aug 17, 2012)

That's a _spider_ plant? Huh. Well, I can buy that. In fact, in the photo I think you can see an offshoot like spider plants produce. Never saw one come up volunteer in the wild before,but I see no reason why they shouldn't. I think I'll go ahead and uproot one to place in a basket and see what happens. Thanks for helping. If I proceed, I'll post another picture. Sigh. So much for making an important botanical discovery!


----------



## Tarac (Sep 18, 2012)

Lol, yes it is common so no major discovery to the community at large.  But it is a fun discovery for you and some others who read this- they can and do appear as feral plants in the right habitats.  They can become quite pesty here in Florida.  

It might even re-variegate if you give it better light, depends on whether it was infected earlier in it's life with mosaic virus or not (and if it has since bred out the weak gene).  

Even though they are common, people pay good money for those things so now you don't have to buy one.  If you put it in a little pot and let it pup everywhere you can probably sell it yourself quite easily.  People pay lots of money for hanging baskets full of Boston Fern here, I see them walking out of our local Spring and Fall plant sales for $20-40 probably more often than I see any other plant being purchased- little do they know it is a horrible invasive that can be found in virtually every single neighborhood in my area, with homeowners spending all kinds of money trying to eradicate it.  So easy to make one yourself, it would take less than a year to produce an overflowing patio basket and just the money to buy the cheap plastic hanging pot.  One man's trash, right?


----------



## Billabong (Nov 24, 2012)

Interesting discovery.  Definitely not a clorophytum comosum.  The width of the leaves when compared to the fingers in the shot are too wide.  Sure there is what appears to be a stolon but that in no way defines it as a C. comosum.  I would be interested to see more pics, perhaps from a different angle, directly above the plant would be helpful.


----------



## pitbulllady (Nov 24, 2012)

Billabong said:


> Interesting discovery.  Definitely not a clorophytum comosum.  The width of the leaves when compared to the fingers in the shot are too wide.  Sure there is what appears to be a stolon but that in no way defines it as a C. comosum.  I would be interested to see more pics, perhaps from a different angle, directly above the plant would be helpful.


I agree that the leaves look too wide for _Chlorophytum comosum_.  What it DOES look like-and it's difficult to make a definitive ID without seeing the actual plant(sorta like tarantulas, lol)-is a _Neomarica gracilis_ off-shoot, the so-called "Walking Iris".  I have one of these which was given to me as a small off-shoot a couple of years ago by an uncle, after I'd commented on the huge adult plant on his patio. I'd referred to it as a "Spider Plant on steroids", although it's not related at all.  The off-shoots look very similar to that of _C. comosum_ and root the same way, but the plant has much wider leaves and is bulkier overall.  They are a very popular outdoor decorator plant here in the South.  I've seen them hung over graves in cemeteries, too, and one of the common names is "Apostle Plant", because of the belief that it won't flower until it produces 12 off-shoots, in honor of the 12 Apostles of Jesus.

pitbulllady


----------



## The Snark (Nov 25, 2012)

Errrm. One way to approximate a guess. Is it rooted in the dirt? If so, it isn't likely to be a bromeliad which are almost all epiphytes. Conversely, if it isn't it is - likely.


----------



## pitbulllady (Nov 25, 2012)

The Snark said:


> Errrm. One way to approximate a guess. Is it rooted in the dirt? If so, it isn't likely to be a bromeliad which are almost all epiphytes. Conversely, if it isn't it is - likely.


If an offshoot of a bromeliad falls on dirt, it will root on dirt; ditto for many other epiphytic plants.  All of my _Rhipsalis, Hatioras, Epiphylum_ and _ Schlumbergeras_, which are epiphytic cacti in their native habitat, are rooted in and grow well in potting soil, and I have a few epiphytic ferns in soil, too.  They are very opportunistic plants.  I've seen native species growing on the ground as well as on like and dead trees while hog hunting in both FL and Louisiana, though none looked like the plant that Tim photographed.  

pitbulllady


----------



## The Snark (Nov 25, 2012)

pitbulllady said:


> If an offshoot of a bromeliad falls on dirt, it will root on dirt; ditto for many other epiphytic plants.  All of my _Rhipsalis, Hatioras, Epiphylum_ and _ Schlumbergeras_, which are epiphytic cacti in their native habitat, are rooted in and grow well in potting soil, and I have a few epiphytic ferns in soil, too.  They are very opportunistic plants.  I've seen native species growing on the ground as well as on like and dead trees while hog hunting in both FL and Louisiana, though none looked like the plant that Tim photographed.
> 
> pitbulllady


Teeerue. They can be tenacious when they land in odd places. But their root structure is noticeably different from normal terrestrials, isn't it? (I'm not one to quote. I've got 15 barely alive orchids I try to keep going while a very healthy monster volunteer grows happily in the drain out on the deck)


----------



## Tarac (Nov 26, 2012)

pitbulllady said:


> I agree that the leaves look too wide for _Chlorophytum comosum_.  What it DOES look like-and it's difficult to make a definitive ID without seeing the actual plant(sorta like tarantulas, lol)-is a _Neomarica gracilis_ off-shoot, the so-called "Walking Iris".  I have one of these which was given to me as a small off-shoot a couple of years ago by an uncle, after I'd commented on the huge adult plant on his patio. I'd referred to it as a "Spider Plant on steroids", although it's not related at all.  The off-shoots look very similar to that of _C. comosum_ and root the same way, but the plant has much wider leaves and is bulkier overall.  They are a very popular outdoor decorator plant here in the South.  I've seen them hung over graves in cemeteries, too, and one of the common names is "Apostle Plant", because of the belief that it won't flower until it produces 12 off-shoots, in honor of the 12 Apostles of Jesus.
> 
> pitbulllady


Can't be Neomarcia- one of the distinguishing characters of Iridaceae are the bilaterally arranged leaves.  While the ends of the leaves can twist a bit and obscure that form, they are bilateral at the base at minimum.  Daylily is also bilateral.  It is almost certainly Chlorophytum.  It's wide because it's in the dark, probably experiences less heat than it wants, and so on.  That's not a very useful character to use for ID.  The best way to confirm this would be to see some reproductive material.  Relative conditions (i.e. wider than expected, lighter than expected) are not good ways to identify a plant as many things can cause them to look slightly off in some way.  

I see a stoloniferous plant with leaves arranged in a whorl (not bilaterally as you find in Neomarcia sp or any other Iridaceae for the matter), smooth leaf margins, growing in a moist disturbed site.  Not too many escapees that fit that bill and don't think there are any temperate growing Bromeliads out there besides three Tillandsia (native) and Bromelia pinguin that escape cultivation.  Even those are very southern species relatively.  

But I'm fairly confident this is the correct ID, I have since showed the image to a plant taxonomist who concurs.

---------- Post added 11-26-2012 at 11:28 AM ----------




pitbulllady said:


> If an offshoot of a bromeliad falls on dirt, it will root on dirt; ditto for many other epiphytic plants.  All of my _Rhipsalis, Hatioras, Epiphylum_ and _ Schlumbergeras_, which are epiphytic cacti in their native habitat, are rooted in and grow well in potting soil, and I have a few epiphytic ferns in soil, too.  They are very opportunistic plants.  I've seen native species growing on the ground as well as on like and dead trees while hog hunting in both FL and Louisiana, though none looked like the plant that Tim photographed.
> 
> pitbulllady


You have seen native species that fell on the ground.  Some bromeliads will root semi-epiphytically in leaf litter should they fall.  None of the native species do- in LA there are only a handful anyway, all Tillandsia ("Ball Moss," "Spanish Moss," and "Bartram's Tillandsia" occur here although I think Bartram's doesn't even grow further than extreme southern GA).  Every last one of the more northern growing will rot on the ground, they do not occur in places with that much moisture retention on the branches they attach (like your extremely tropical cacti which occur in places dripping with moisture and covered in mosses, like many orchids as well) to and so are extremely intolerant of "wet feet" and won't find moist humus acceptable substitute for a dry, well circulated branch.  

Bromelia pinguin is an obligate terrestrial but it is huge (3' across possibly more) and absolutely wicked to work with due to it's large, alternately toothed leaves.  The actual native species are only dying when you see them on the ground, I assure you.  This plant in the post is definitely not a bromeliad of any kind.

---------- Post added 11-26-2012 at 11:35 AM ----------




Billabong said:


> Interesting discovery.  Definitely not a clorophytum comosum.  The width of the leaves when compared to the fingers in the shot are too wide.  Sure there is what appears to be a stolon but that in no way defines it as a C. comosum.  I would be interested to see more pics, perhaps from a different angle, directly above the plant would be helpful.


The leaves of average Chlorophytum range from 0.5-1.5" and that doesn't even include extremes from many of the odd cultivars.  I wager his fingers are less than 1" in width, putting the leaves comfortably in the range of a C. comosum.  One character doesn't give it away, certainly.  But the combination of the morphology, habitat in which it was found and latitude does.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## The Snark (Nov 26, 2012)

Tarac; your post was well worth a read.
By any chance, could you point me to info, or even the name of the phenomenon where the roots of the epiphytes have to alter between being moist and drying out which prevents micro-organisms from taking hold and inducing decomposition? As I understand it, it's a cyclic event which was described to me by a Dr. Enari(sp) of the L.A. County Arboretum (Santa Anita-Baldwin Ave)


----------



## Tarac (Nov 27, 2012)

The Snark said:


> Tarac; your post was well worth a read.
> By any chance, could you point me to info, or even the name of the phenomenon where the roots of the epiphytes have to alter between being moist and drying out which prevents micro-organisms from taking hold and inducing decomposition? As I understand it, it's a cyclic event which was described to me by a Dr. Enari(sp) of the L.A. County Arboretum (Santa Anita-Baldwin Ave)


Hmm, interesting question.  Not sure about that particular literature but I will see what I can find out from Botany, see if they have any plant physiologist that are familiar with the term.

What I know- some plants have dimorphic roots (i.e. many Aeroids or Cactaceae, producing two entirely different roots that are geotrophic or not) some plants utilize structural changes like orchids that begin to produce root hairs when in more consistent contact with moisture, some (ferns) exhibit poikilohydry and so on.  I suspect the mechanism varies across the plant kingdom with habitat.  What plants was he talking about specifically?  All epiphytes?  It may be that he was talking about a certain clade.

A lot of plants exude chemistry that change the rhizosphere around their roots which most certainly promotes colonization with beneficial organisms and excludes those which are detrimental.  Generally they are promoting vesicular-arbuscular colonization with mycrorrhiza.  Likely this plays a role, promoting resistance through colonization with something protecting and functional in terms of nutrient and water uptake at once.  This is for hemiepiphytes of course.  How exactly that microbe-root exudate is mediated or what that cycle is called I couldn't say, I'm not sure that has been well characterized yet.  I will ask although I might have to ask for an ecophysiologist.


----------

