51st state

Note the aspect ratio of the leaves, much longer than Maurelli.

Attached Images

	DSCF4751.JPG (2.12 MB, 31 views)
	DSCF4749.JPG (2.11 MB, 23 views)
	DSCF4750.JPG (2.14 MB, 18 views)

__________________
a>

griphuz

Hi Kev,
Is this the result of chopping one, or are these from TC?

Kind regards,
Remko.

51st state

Hi Remko

Mine got too big to keep so i chopped it

Attached Images

	DSCF3625.JPG (2.16 MB, 23 views)
	DSCF3630.JPG (2.16 MB, 21 views)

__________________
a>

jmoore

Nice one Kev, are you going to try and get pups?

51st state

Yes if they make it through the winter

__________________
a>

Gabe15

Avoid using the name Ensete Ventricosum Var. Montbelliardii, this looks as though it is actually a valid, described botanical variety, but it is not.

Instead, use Ensete ventricosum 'Montbelliardii'. This shows it is just a simple trade name for the selection, a cultivar, and not a botanically described variety.

__________________
Growing bananas in Colorado, Hawaii and Washington since 2004.

SteveW

Looks like you've had better luck propping yours than I have Kev.
Only managed 1 rooted pup so far.The corm started rotting soon after the pups started to appear on mine.Still got a small piece of rooted corm with pups forming out in the prop.So I've got my fingers crossed I'll get a few more.
Plenty of hinibas though : )

51st state

Hi Gabe, You are of course correct. David Constantine from who I bought the parent comments:-

The name 'Montbeliardii' derives from Musa Ensete J. F. Gmelin var. Montbeliardi D. Bois. Bois named the plant in commemoration of the Marquis de Scey-Montbeliard de Brun who had supplied him with the plant after J. Maurel had first drawn attention to the red-leaved "bananas" of Ethiopia.
Unlike its "sister" 'Maurelii' (see above), Bois had no difficulty assigning this plant to Musa ensete, calling it var. Montbeliardi (sic). Musa ensete is now reduced under Ensete ventricosum and this was formalised for var. Montbeliardii by Cufodontis 1972 who treats the plant as a botanical variety like Bois. However, from the context of the "discovery" of the plants by Maurel and from Bois' paper it is possible to deduce that this plant is a cultivated variety (cultivar) and not a naturally occurring variety growing and reproducing itself in the "wild". That the plant is a cultivated form and not a wild form means that the name given by Bois should properly have been accorded cultivar status by Cufodontis and written as 'Montbeliardii' and not var. Montbeliardii. Finally, to accord with modern practise under the International Code of Nomenclature of Cultivated Plants, cultivar names commemorating a person should (in this case) end in "ii".

Also, to further clarify

'Montbeliardii' was re-introduced in 2003 by the UK nursery KobaKoba.

It is not possible directly to link the material re-introduced by KobaKoba to the 'Montbeliardii' previously cultivated by California Jungle Gardens. So, why use the name? KobaKoba thought long and hard about how to name this plant and consulted with others. Eventually it was decided that it was best to revive the name 'Montbeliardii' rather than encumber the literature with a new name. The plant introduced by KobaKoba is more than a fair match both for Bois' original description of 'Montbeliardii', "trunk, petiole and mid-rib dark red purple, underside of adult leaf lamina tinged red-purple", and for Graf's photograph which shows a tall, slender and distinctly elegant plant. Herbarium material has been deposited with the RHS. 'Montbeliardii' is quite different from its twin sister 'Maurelii'. As beautiful as it is, 'Maurelii' is a rather squat plant, growing as wide as it does tall. 'Montbeliardii' on the other hand, while not quite as brightly coloured as 'Maurelii' especially as a young plant, shoots skyward like a purple fountain.

__________________
a>