|
Home
> Virtual Greenhouse
What is a Superba?
By Brad Thompson
This question comes up fairly often; “what
is a superba?” What it means now isn’t
necessarily what it has always meant. Also,
I think there need to be some modifications
to what the criteria is for calling a cane a
superba type.
Originally, the definition of what made a
superba was that it had certain parentage.
Eva Kenworthy Gray produced the first
superba type canes in 1926 when she crossed
B. aconitifolia with B. ‘Lucerna’.
The resulting plants all had names with
superba in the name such as B. ‘Superba
Azella’. Later, the superba name that she
used in her hybrids was adopted to include
all canes of similar parentage. The original
definition included all canes that had B.
aconitifolia, B. sceptrum, and B.
leathermanaie (at the time known as
B. plantanifolia) as a parent. They
all shared the feature of having large,
lobed or deeply cleft leaves, on large
growing plants. They were totally different
than previous canes of the time so were
separated out as a new type.
As you can imagine, since 1926 there have
been lots of generations and a multitude of
new hybrids created. Many have very mixed
parentage. Some newer superbas while having
the correct background, such as having B.
aconitifolia as a distant ancestor, have
lots of other cane types in their background
also. I guess it is easier to explain that
all new superbas do meet the original
definition, it’s what isn’t a superba that’s
different. While originally all hybrids of
B. aconitifolia, B. sceptrum,
and B. leathermanaie were superbas,
not all of their subsequent generations
would now be considered superbas. An example
is B. ‘De Cups’. One of its parents is B.
‘Jumbo Jet’ (a superba) and its other parent
is B. ‘Lenore Olivier’ which is not.
Technically, it is a superba because it has
the correct parentage, but it lacks the
lobed or cleft leaves which is what set
superbas apart in the first place. In other
words, it really isn’t a superba. A similar
hybrid, as far as parents, B. ‘Lothlorien’
(B. ‘Jumbo Jet’ x B. philippine cane) does
however have both the correct parentage and
the lobed leaves. To further confuse you, B.
‘Little Miss Mummey’ (B. ‘Jumbo Jet’ x B.
‘Amelia’), is somewhere in between. It does
have lobed leaves but not as large or as
lobed as the other plants we associate with
superbas like B. ‘Sophie Cecile’.
A more correct definition for what makes a
cane a superba is one that has B.
aconitifolia, B. sceptrum, or B.
leathermanaie in its parentage and
also has the lobed or cleft leaves. This
would put some plants that have a little
superba blood in them out of the superba
division because they really don’t show the
superba characteristics. Because of the
blurring and interbreeding of superbas with
the other types to introduce new
characteristics, it’s probably time that
some new classes are devised for canes that
fall somewhere in between superbas and the
rubra type. Rubra types are all the canes
that aren’t superbas as in B. ‘Orange Rubra’.
I’ve always had a problem with the use of
“all others” to describe all the canes that
aren’t either superba or mallet. Those
should more correctly be called rubra type
possibly. Those canes with serrations or
different edging to the leaves, that may
contain some superba blood but that aren’t
fully superbas, could be called
intermediate. Of course using those classes
there are a few that fall through the cracks
like B. lubbersii, who knows where to
put that?
|
