Interesting.
Did you do the cross? Can you post any photos of this plant?

No, someone gave it to me. It's never had a bit of care. It has a bloom that looks just like you'd expect a cross to look like...it has 3-4 light red orange blossoms that are slightly smaller than an amaryllis. It often blooms more than once each spring, and it requires no care. In fact, I'm always surprised when it blooms because I forget about it. It just sits on my patio amid a bunch of ferns and other plants that I hardly even water! I went ahead and repotted it without trimming the leaves, which are still flopped over. don't have a photo, but can take one when it blooms.

Please do! I never knew such a hybrid was possible, since Clivias are from Africa and Hippeastrum are from South America. I thought they developed to far apart from each other to cross. How do the seeds look? Are they paper-ish like Hippeastrum or are they like the Clivia-berries?

Hello everyone!

I hope that I am able to clarify things a bit.

The genera Amaryllis, Clivia, and Hippeastrum share a common family (Amaryllidaceae). However, unlike Hippeastrums, the monotypic genus Amaryllis (meaning having only one species) specifically Amaryllis belladonna (common name Naked Ladies) and Clivia (common name Kaffir Lily) are both natives of southern Africa.

My guess is that missmollyo's bulb is an intergeneric hybrid of Amaryllis belladonna x Clivia miniata. If my guess were correct, the seeds would not be papery like those of Hippeastrum hybrids. Instead the seeds would be carried in berries like those of Clivia or in seedpods that become papery and burst open when the rounded (white to pink) fleshy seeds are ripe like those of Amaryllis belladonna.

Cheers,

Blanca

I've always wondered why the bulb industry perpetuates the name confusion... Amaryllis has only one bulb in its family, Belladonna. Hippeastrum is the correct name for all the hybrid bulbs we grow.

And then there's Lycoris squamigera, which is hardy in the northern zones and very closely resembles Amaryllis Belladonna. They're both commonly called Naked Ladies.

It's very confusing for the beginning grower.

I know I'm going to raise a lot of dust by saying what I'm about to say. You don't have to agreed or disagree, this just one opinion, mine, so take it the way you want it, I wont go any further than what I'm writing here.

Personally I think that the change from amaryllis to hippeastrum was a terrible mistake from the start and it was very badly received by almost every one when it occurred, historical texts tells us so at least. At that time, the word "amaryllis" was very well known, there were several known species and several hundred hybrids. When you mentioned the word "amaryllis", almost every one knew what you were talking about.

So we decided to give a very well known name to a genus containing only 1 almost unknown species, and to give a completely unknown name to a genus containing many well known species and hybrids. ATTABOY!!! WOW!!! The peoples who thought about that had to be geniuses, nothing less!

So, the most knowledgeable started to say "hippeastrum". The unavoidable answer was "what is that?" followed by another unavoidable answer, "amaryllis" and then, "oh yeah, I know, the big red showy flowers!"

This forum is a very closed and very limited. We know what a hippeastrum is supposed to be. But outside of this very small circle, nobody knows and nobody cares. Only a few persons deal with it, most peoples who occasionally by one of these bulbs don't know about this forum and they are not really interested in knowing more, all they want is a big showy red flower. Try to sell these bulbs by writing only "hippeastrum" on the box, and nobody or almost will by them, they have no idea of what it is. Now do the opposite, write only "amaryllis" and they'll sell very well. So outside the very small circle that we represent, nobody knows or care what hippeastrums are, but they know what amaryllis are even if they don't care beyond that point.

The big companies have no choice: if they want to sell their stuff, they MUST use the name amaryllis otherwise they wont sell much. And I hear some peoples say that it is matter of educating the crowd to learn that the plants they like is not an amaryllis. If you are after fighting a lost battle, you wont find a better one than this one.

To me, there is only one solution to correct the terrible mistake made several decades ago: what is now known as hippeastrum should revert back to being called amaryllis, and the one left alone, name it something else. I don't grow hippeastrums no more, only plants that peoples generally recognize well, amaryllis.

Laurier

Very well said, Laurier

Hi Laurier,
I see it that way too. Renaming that whole bunch of species to Hippeastrum might have the reason that the African species was described before. So the later discovered South American ones had to get a new name. I'm not sure if this is true, but this is how botanical nomenclature normally works. If I don't want to use the botanical name I go with "Knights star lily", it's more correct this way.
Since the name Amaryllis does stick to most people and only a few grow the "real Amaryllis" I was sure this thread was about a hybrid with Hippeastrum. The way Blanca saw it, it makes more sense. I would love to hear more about this cross, does it have a bulb? I thought that Clivia builds a rhizome rather than a bulb.

The reason we have correct nomenclature is to ensure everyone is talking about the same plant....the fact that some people can not deal with this is beside the point entirely....regardless of how many people that includes. If Amaryllis was assigned first to the plant in South Africa then that plant deserves the name....not any other plant. The fact that a bunch of uneducated people came along later and said, hey, this new plant from the new world looks an awful lot like the Amaryllis we all know from South Africa does not mean they should have taken the name and used it incorrectly.....these growers and hybridizers should have done the right thing a long time ago and that is come up with a better common name to describe Hippeastrum rather than using a genus name that already existed......they are the ones that made the awful mistake that we now have to deal with!! You can not fix a problem by changing the historical facts........off my soap-box now and sorry if I offended anyone :o) Dan

Hey ! How bout the "Blue Amaryllis"? Worsleya :)

If you call Hippeastrum "Knights Star Lily" almost no one will know what yer talkin about.
Then there's all those crosses such as amarcrinum, and other South African bulbus amaryllids.

The serious fern folks like common names because even savvy growers may not be fluent in Latin :)

Here in Germany, the Term "Knights Star Lily", "Ritterstern" is quite common. I've seen boxes that had all three names on them, "Amaryllis - Ritterstern" on the front and on the back the description read about the genus Hippeastrum" ... ;)
You don't have to be fluent in Latin. Come on, if you heard me say Hippeastrum you wouldn't understand, in each country it's pronounced differently. Even my professors don't stick to one pronunciation.

Exactly Pat, the reason they call it Amarcrinum is be make sure you know it is an Amaryllis x Crinum.....Crinocharis for Crinum x Ammocharis, etc. By sticking to proper nomenclature such as this you know what you have. I find very few people refer to Worsleya as Blue Amaryllis, but when they do it always causes confusion.....people think there is such a thing as a blue Hippeastrum.....no such thing unfortunately, but that would be lovely wouldn't it :o) Dan

Since Amaryllis is the more commonly known name for these hybrids, I usually begin my diatribes by saying... "The Hippeastrum, more commonly known as Amaryllis, blah blah blah..."

This way, I think the more serious gardeners can be made aware that Amaryllis is just the common name, and that Hippeastrum is the official Latin term.

It's funny... I have a horrible memory, made even worse by the head injury I suffered in an accident a few years ago... and the one thing I remember quite clearly is the Latin terminology for all the perennials and tender plants I grow! Imagine that! And I tend to be quite a stickler for the correct Latin, if I know it.

Many times... I'll ask at a garden center if they have a particular plant, and they give me a blank look, like I just spoke an alien language from another planet! But if I mention the plant's common name, they go, "Oh! Yes, we have that!"

Plant Slang! I guess you'd call it plant slang... and if there is more than one common name for a plant, it can get confusing.

I try to label all my plants by their Latin, or proper, names... it's important to me to know what they really are.

I have to agree with Dan... plants are classified for a reason, and in a certain order... for those of us seriously into gardening and plants, we'll probably always choose the proper names... but since the retail industry is what it is, and money is the bottom line... the common names will persist. It's sort of a shame, I think.

No one is against taxonomy and nomenclature, they are a MUST. I know there are rules that applies, but the "by the book" attitude that prevailed then and now is very sad and VERY WRONG, whatever the reasons are to support such a closed up mind attitude. It is not because there is a book that analysis, common sense and judgment shouldn't have a place in the room of decision, which was not really the case as we understand history today.

The "bunch of uneducated people" were mostly very renowned scientists, botanists, taxonomists, person who discovered species, persons who first described a species and the location where it was found, even persons that gave their name to some species. These peoples were just as well informed and educated as their opponents if not more. Gosh sometime I wish I was that uneducated!!!... (:

This is most certainly not the first and only taxonomy mistake that was ever made by some nomenclature scientists. There is nothing wrong in admitting that there could be a mistake, have a serious and in depth analysis made and may be change their mind. No need to change historical facts, just take into account the reality of then and now, make a very good analysis of what is involved, use good old common sense and above all sound judgement, and why not write a new page in history? There could could be others solutions to this problem as well, but keeping the hard line is NOT one that is acceptable.

But of course, there is nobody that oversees what is going on in this field, except KAVB, which IS the one supposed to play a very big part, but what do they do? All they do is register new Dutch Hybrids almost exclusively while they are supposed to deal with the whole world in the whole amaryllis field. If you visit their site, it is in Dutch only. How inviting!...

So let's keep the strict by the book attitude, and in 20, 50 years, peoples of then will still be fighting to implement the word "hippeastrum" without much success as it has been the case for many decades (7?) now. Everybody will be a looser, only the poor short vision scientists of the past will be the winners. Open up our minds, lets have a second look at the things, put some analysis, common sense and judgement, and everyone can win, in less than 5 years, the subject will only be a bad memory.

That change was a short vision and very sad mistake. There are better solutions than saying: we are wrong, we know we are wrong, we will not change, so deal with it.

Got to go, I have to water my amaryllis now!

Laurier

There was no mistake made....that is just the fact!!! Amaryllis was first ascribed to a certain plant...that takes precedence....period, end of story, no need to be a revisionist when it comes to history, even if you disagree with it!!!

As a scientist that publishes routinely I am expected to hold to a certain criteria which is important if we want to maintain proper scientific discourse. While the channels I work on were first called IK1 and SK4 (cloned by two labs that published one week apart) any paper now must conform to the correct name as assigned by the governing body, which is KCa3.1. The same goes for Hippeastrum.......not really sure what the gripe is, but I agree with the original post....I am done with this as it only causes problems as we disagree.....I'm happy to simply disagree and talk about the lovely plants we grow....Amaryllis or Hippeastrum!!

Good growing all :o) Dan

I was recently on a website in which I believe a lady was offering Hippeastrums with blue flowers! Gotta look for that! They must be RARE!
Also longing to see a photo of an amaryllis x clivia cross.