There are rules in both science and horticulture that dictate the proper use of names.  Many of the names often used for this specimen do not fall within those rules!  Alocasia zebrina reticulata form appears to be the only name that currently can be used.  Here's a great example as explained by my friend Derek Birch who is the editor of the International Aroid Soceity journal, Aroideana, "the prefix “cv.” is no longer valid to indicate a cultivar. The only way of writing a cultivar name is now in roman script with capital letters for the words and inside single quotation marks. So when you write “Incorrectly Alocasia zebrina cv. reticulata”, the response is “yes, but it would be incorrect even if it were written Alocasia zebrina ‘Reticulata’, which would be correct for a registered cultivar name apart from the Latinized form of the name”.

If you do a search of the internet, you can easily find specimens, which are almost certain to be variable forms of Alocasia zebrina, being offered for sale under the names Alocasia 'Reticulata', Alocasia tigrina and Alocasia 'Tigrina Superba'.  The use of the word 'Reticulata' in single quotes would indicate this is a registered cultivar, but apparently no such registration has ever been recorded as you just read and will read in a message from Alocasia botanist Lord Alistair Hay.  If you attempt to locate any of these names (other than Alocasia zebrina) on one of the major scientific databases you will quickly learn none exists in the world of science.   In some references it appears the name reticulata dates back to grower Bob Wilson of Fantastic Gardens who was in business in the Miami, FL area in the 1980's.  However, that term can be found in plant literature preceding Wilson's sale of the plant.  The name Alocasia 'Reticulata' is also currently in use by a tissue culture company as a result of the reticulated appearance on the leaf blade of this unusual Alocasia.  Attempting to grant such names scientifically is similar to attempting to give every human being on Earth a different species name simply because their faces are not exactly alike.  But is Alocasia zebrina var. reticulata truly a variation of Alocasia zebrina? That is yet to be absolutely scientifically confirmed.  As you will read, the evidence is clearly mounting.  Julius explains further,  "Aroids, in particular the genera Alocasia,  appear to sometimes morph spontaneously into new cultivars. This happens even under natural ''wild'' conditions."   This information is presented in order to assist serious growers to reach some conclusion on their own.  Alocasia species are known to be highly variable and not every leaf of every specimen will always appear the same.  This link explains in non-scientific language the details of natural variation and morphogenesis.  Click here.

As aroid botanist Dr. Tom Croat explained in one of his published papers, natural changes are simply the nature of plant evolution.  A very interesting quote can be found within Dr. Croat's and Monica Carlen's Taxonomic Revision of the Section Semaeophyllium in regard to Anthurium species states, "Size of any morphological structure in Anthurium is highly variable because plants often change remarkably in size over the course of their lives and also in response to the general climatic conditions where they occur, particularly in geographically widespread species.  Habit, Stem, and Cataphylls".  As a result, the size of the leaf, the shape of the leaf, the size of the spathe, the size of almost any feature of any aroid can be variable!  Size and leaf shape does not matter! 

Originally published to science in 1863, Alocasia zebrina is known to be a variable species which is capable of producing more than one leaf form.  Variation is quite common among aroid species, but, as Julius pointed out is especially prominent within the genus Alocasia.  Botanists including Alistair Hay are in the process of reclassifying numerous specimens, previously thought to be individual species, into a single merged species' name.   Difference in the blade appearance alone is not sufficient evidence to presume a plant is actually a unique species.  What truly determines a species are distinct characteristics in the sexual portions of each plant, the spathe and spadix.  Photos of the spathe and spadix of the reticulated form of Alocasia zebrina reticulata form appear on this page.  The spathe is not a flower but is instead simply a modified leaf.  Those sexual characteristics now appear to be one and the same.  It appears likely both Alocasia zebrina var. reticulata and Alocasia 'Tigrina Superba' may be sports of the species Alocasia zebrina.  It also appears this may be another conflict between horticulture and science due to the known variations within this species, but Alocasia zebrina var. reticulata does remain somewhat of a mystery since the true origin of the plant is not known.  As a result, horticulturists have attempted to give variations of the species Alocasia zebrina totally new names, often sounding scientific, which are not truly scientifically accepted.

This information received from botanist Alistair Hay may help to lead us to a resolution, "I think this is a mess!  Not your page, just the general situation re this name.  First, is it really a sport - i.e. a vegetative mutant growing out of and taken from something else. I would have thought direct evidence of this status would be required. I suspect it is a variant seedling of A. zebrina, though of course it could be hybrid of some sort.  Second, as far as I can see (and as you say) this species name seems never to have been published properly.  I just tried searching the IPNI database but it keeps timing out, but I don't recall seeing this name as a valid species name when I was looking at Alocasia in detail.  Third, I don't think it can be valid as a cultivar name. Latin species names can only be transferred across as cultivar names if it can be demonstrated that the originally published "species" is a cultivar. If, as we suspect, this has never been validly published as a species name, it is invalid as a cultivar name simply because it is Latin.  Fourth, if the plant was released as a cultivar with a "pseudo species" name, it should be re-named properly (i.e. with an English or other modern language epithet and published with a description and pic either with the introducer's consent, or not, if someone has released a cultivar with an invalid name, they have had their shot at it and it would be open to anyone to rename the plant, though I do think that should be done properly: i.e. publishing it in either Aroideana or the IAS Newsletter with a pic and description. These sort of messy situations need a formal determination by the ICRA and possibly consultation with the ISHS commission for cultivar registration and nomenclature."  IPNI refers to the International Plant Names Index and ISHS refers to the International Society for Horticultural Science.

The confusion over this specimen appears to date back some years.  Alistair pointed out, "I searched Google books for Alocasia reticulata and got only one result which can't be viewed, but the name allegedly appears in Wood, Allen H. (1941), Try These Indoors, Published by Hale, Cushman and Flint."   "Try Those Indoors" was a book about houseplants.  The name reticulata was then again briefly described as a variation of Alocasia in the 1983 International Aroid Society journal Aroideana, Volume 7, numbers 3/4 by David Burnett where he appears to use Alocasia 'Reticulata' only as a horticultural name.  David wrote, "This plant seems to have been released by Fantastic Gardens, Florida, sometime in the last ten years.  It is still uncommon in the USA and virtually unknown elsewhere.  It's origins are, so far as I can determine, unknown.  I doubt that it is a species and it is not likely be be a hybrid.  Perhaps it is simply a sport or varietal form of a species.  I have placed it among the Philippine Alocasia for reasons that I find extremely difficult to explain in words.  Somehow the plant evokes a relationship with A. zebrina and A. 'Tigrina Superba', yet; some of its characteristics are distinct from both.  I have not had sufficient experience with the plant to describe it, so I shall let the photograph speak for itself for the time being."  However, in his discussion David offered no measurements and no definitive information.  More recent publications have at least implied it is a sport of Alocasia zebrina, but the scientific jury remains with no final verdict.  Following my request for information from members of the aroid discussion group Aroid l, I received this response from former IAS president, Scott Hyndman, "When I first saw this Alocasia at the now long ago closed Fantastic  Gardens Nursery of Miami in 1981 it was sold as Alocasia zebrina cv Reticulata."  However, as Julius explained early in this article, the use of "cv" in relation to this plant is improper since no such cultivar has ever been registered.  As can be seen in these two photos, even the spathe and spadix of Alocasia zebrina can have variations.  The plant on the right appears to be filled with seed.

 

Alocasia zebrina is endemic to (exclusively found in) a very few islands in the Philippines, and the reticulated leaf form at least appears to be an unusual variation of the species yet to have been found in nature.   Alocasia zebrina reticulata form simply possesses the unusual leaf reticulation.   The name "zebrina" was granted as a result of the pattern on the petiole (stem).  Known variations of many species are commonly mislabeled by a large number of plant sellers.   Unfortunately, many also often attempt to display the name in italics which is not an accepted practice for non-scientific terms.  The commercial name Alocasia 'Reticulata' appears to be currently improperly in use as a trade name, but as pointed out earlier, is not the name of any registered cultivar.  Thus the use of the single quotes is inappropriate.   Additionally, no one is certain where the commonly used name of a somewhat similar sport, Alocasia tigrina, originated as well.  Some sources indicate Alocasia tigrina is a species name and display it in italics, but according to aroid botanist Pete Boyce in Singapore, "The name Alocasia tigrina does not exist. It has been applied to Alocasia zebrina in the trade for the clone with the very well-marked petioles.  Alocasia zebrina is endemic to the Philippines and restricted to the islands of Luzon, Mindanao, Leyte, Samar, Biliran and Alabat. It is easily distinguished from all other Philippine Alocasia species by the rather narrowly sagittate leaves with striped petioles and rather long acute posterior lobes bearing lamina to the sinus but not or only very narrowly peltate."   A sagittate leaf is one that is arrow shaped.  Peltate refers to the position the petiole is attached to the leaf blade near the center of the blade.  The petiole of Alocasia zebrina are virtually identical to that of Alocasia zebrina var. reticulata, but the leaves are quite different.

In her excellent source book Aroids, Plants of the Arum Family, author Deni Bown writes on page 184 regarding the Alocasia zebrina group,  "Although most Alocasias are admired for their leaves, a few are grown for their beautifully patterned stalks. Alocasia zebrina was first collected by Gould Veitch in 1862 when he was searching for Phalaenopsis orchids on the Philippine island of Luzon and has since been seriously over collected.  It has elegant glossy, non-peltate, narrowly sagittate leaves up to 3 ft. (1 m) which point upwards, and strikingly banded stalks 3 1/2 ft. (1.1 meters) long, are green to almost white with horizontal zigzag mottling in dark brown. The cultivar 'Tigrina Superba' is particularly fine, with slender bluish leaves whose margins curl under, black veins on the undersurface. banded, sometimes blackish-green stalks.  The species known as A. wenzelii is now considered synonymous with A. tigrina (Hay 1999a).  It was indistinguishable from A. tigrina in appearance but differed in being rather short lived, larger and faster-growing - a cultivated seedling being on record as having produced leaves 4 1/2 ft. (1.4 m) long in 13 months (Burnett 1984) Plants labeled A. wenzelii must therefore now be considered as a robust clone of A. tigrina and as such are probably a better proposition for commercial cultivation."  Deni continues, "Alocasia 'Reticulata' has obvious similarities to the plants described in the last paragraph, but its origins are unknown. It has not been recorded in the wild and may be a sport."

Although certainly informative, Deni's information does not totally clarify the current question of whether or not what we are calling Alocasia var. reticulata is in fact a variation of Alocasia zebrina.   However, additional information from aroid hybridizer LariAnn Garner, along with the information provided by Alistair Hay, may put us a step closer to a resolution with her observations regarding the inflorescence (spathe and spadix), which is the reproductive organ of any aroid.  LariAnn concluded, "While the inflorescences are very similar, the leaf texture is markedly different from both "reticulata" and "tigrina".  The petioles are more definitively striped rather than just coarsely mottled, as "tigrina" and "reticulata" are.  The leaf blades have a thickness, almost a leathery texture, that both of the others lack completely.  The leaves are discolorous (upper surface and lower surface different shades of green), which is similar to "tigrina" but unlike "reticulata", whose leaves are concolorous, and the veination is not prominent at all.  The width of the leaf blades is significantly greater, especially in mature specimens, than in either of the other two.  If you saw all three plants side by side, you'd likely conclude that "reticulata" is a sport of "tigrina", not zebrina!"

At present, adequate scientific information has simply not been published to determine a positive status for Alocasia zebrina var. reticulata.  It does certainly appear the specimen is a variation of Alocasia zebrina, but lacking verified evidence published by a qualified botanical scientist, a scientific determination appears not yet complete.  This is one of Alistair's most recent messages, "As I said, the botanical reticulata could be used as the cultivar epithet as in Alocasia 'Reticulata', provided the species or variety name was given to this clone (i.e. it is equivalent to a cv) and not to a range of similar clones. However, to qualify for that, it must go back in its usage to prior to Jan 1 1959. If it is later than that, it cannot be used as the cv name.  It seems pretty clear that this is not a distinct species, and botanical variety is just not an appropriate category for a horticultural thing like this: it needs to be given a cv name!"  And in one final email Lord Alistair had this comment, "A. tigrina has no botanical merit and is simply a particularly attractive form of zebrina which should be recognized as a cultivar if it is a clone. The same applies as before, if it is a clone and the name has been published before 1959 in a way which meets the conditions for establishment of a cultivar name (which are less onerous than the conditions for valid publication of a botanical name), then it can be transferred across as a cultivar name Alocasia 'Tigrina'. Ditto 'Tigrina Superba'.   However, I have tended to take a rather conservative view of species definitions in Alocasia - i.e. not splitting off slight variations as species, and others might disagree. The view of Aroid botanists in the Philippines may be different!" 

So what should we call this specimen?  This post made July 9, 2008 on Aroid l by aroid botanist Pete Boyce in Malaysia offers a suggestion, "As you know, Alistair Hay in his herbarium-based account of Philippines' Alocasia (Gardens' Bulletin Singapore 51: 1-41 (1999)) treated A. zebrina as a variable species and included under that name A. wenzelii. He made no mention of the name A. tigrina (or A. zebrina tigrina) as this name and any combination thereof has never been formally published and thus from a strict botanical standpoint dos not exist. Goerverts et al. include a further name as a provisional syn. (A. liervalii) but without further discussion.

Not withstanding the strict application of application of published names, it is clear to anyone who grows A. zebrina that there are several conspicuously different (but likewise clearly allied) entities in cultivation, among which the form with reticulated venation is particularly striking. What of course is needed is a comprehensive field study to try to untangle these cultivated clones and see where they may have originated."

For now, It appears best to only call this plant  Alocasia zebrina reticulata form but that name has not been verified by any qualified botanist.  It certainly does not appear correct to call it simply Alocasia 'Reticulata' since the specimen has apparently never been registered.  As Alistair noted, the name for this specimen "is a mess".   And serious aroid collector Russ Hammer may have helped to make this discussion even more confusing when he commented, "This is a small thing, and it is commonly used, but I dislike the word 'cultivar'.  'Cultivated variety' suggests the plant does not exist in nature, and that is probably never the case.  Any plant that sports naturally in our yards and greenhouses has certainly been duplicated in the wild.  I prefer 'variety' or 'sport' in all cases."
 
Our specimen in the top two photographs was a gift from avid collector Teri Baber and is grown in a well draining soil mixture that is kept damp.   The specimen is grown in indirect, yet relatively bright mottled light.  The species and variations are known to go dormant at temperatures below 12.75 C (55 degrees F).  Protect from any freeze.

My thanks to aroid expert Julius Boos for his assistance as well as to Pete Boyce and LariAnn Garner.   And my sincere thanks to Alistair Hay for checking this page and offering his valuable input. 

One personal note of explanation:  Lord Hay legitimately possesses his title as a result of family heritage, however he rarely uses the title with his name. Some in the aroid community have referred to Alistair, now retired, as Sir Hay.  He recently informed me he is not "Sir".  Alistair resides several hours south of Sydney, Australia and currently grows Brugmansia.  His website address is: http://www.MerooMeadowPerennials.com.au/