Gigantochloa sp. 'Quail'

Characteristics: Habit tight caespitose. Rhizome pachymorph, short-necked. Culms straight, erect, bending outwards above, height 15 m. Young shoots green with brown hairs, conical, with culm-leaf blades erect, purplish-green, emerge from June to August. Culm-internodes terete, (25) 30–40 (45) cm long, mid-green to dark green, smooth, initially thinly farinose and with silvery-white short, early deciduous hairs mainly on the upper third or half of the internode, becoming glabrous and almost glossy, changing to dull mid-green with age; diameter 6.0 cm; walls thick throughout culm, basal culm solid (culm at 0.8 m height above the ground by 6 cm in diameter is solid; at 1.6 m height by 5.2 cm in diameter is solid; at 2.4 m height by 5.0 cm in diameter, wall width 2.0 cm; at 3.2 m height by 4.8 cm in diameter, wall width 1.6 cm). Culm-nodes not or slightly prominent; sheath scar marginally protruding; supranodal line usually obscure, sometimes clearly discernible and then with a slight ridge, 5–10 mm above the nodal line; with a thinly white fuzzy ring 10 mm high above sheath scar, and a narrow, 3 mm high ring below the sheath scar, the fuzz easily removable and soon disappearing, then the node is glabrous and smooth; aerial roots present on the first 2–3 nodes above the ground. Branch-buds solitary, large, broadly ovate, 2.5–3.5 cm wide and 2.0–2.5 cm high, with the upper margins initially short white erect ciliate, present from the basal nodes up. Branches with the central branch dominant, with 2 subdominant side branches, and several smaller branches; to 2.3 m long, solid to thick-walled (a thin branch, 4 mm thick, has a lacuna diameter of less than 1 mm); branching from the mid-culm up, bud usually dormant on the lower culm, or short rudimentary downwards-bent branches develop; branching intravaginal; rebranching. Culm-leaves deciduous. Culm-leaf sheaths about 20 cm wide near the base, 22–30 cm long, 1/2–3/4 as long as the internode; leathery; light brown with a reddish tint when young, rarely with a few yellowish streaks, straw-colored when dry, covered with short light to dark brown appressed hairs, denser towards the base; margins irregularly short pale ciliate or eciliate; apex rounded with the middle part (junction with the sheath) concave-depressed. Culm-leaf auricles low rims, extending from the blade base towards but not reaching the margins of the sheath, about 1–2 mm high, gradually increasing height to 2–3 mm and oval-shaped at their ends, blackish when young, entire, without bristles, or with a few early caducous whitish, short and waved bristles. Culm-leaf ligule about 1 cm irregularly high, dark colored when young, irregularly denticulate, with 1–4 mm irregularly long white erect fringes when young. Culm-leaf blades leathery, persistent, initially erect, patent with age, triangular, size relatively small, about 10 cm long on the mid-culm, much shorter on the basal and lower culm, the basal width 2–2.5 cm, which equals the width of the junction with the sheath; glabrous abaxially, with appressed short pale or brown hairs adaxially, green when young (initially dark green to purplish green), straw-colored when dry; apex attenuate; margins antrorsely scaberulous. Foliage-leaves 4–6 (12) per branchlet. Foliage-leaf sheaths light green to orange-green when young, glabrous, margins eciliate. Foliage-leaf auricles inconspicuous or none, without bristles. Foliage-leaf ligule inconspicuous. Foliage-leaf blades soft, mid-green, and glabrous on both surfaces; linear-lanceolate to linear, (9) 12–18 cm × (1.0) 1.3–1.7 cm, base rounded to wedge-shaped; apex attenuate to acuminate; margins antrorsely scabrous; midrib proximally slightly prominent and light green beneath; pseudopetiole 1–2 mm long. Flowers and seeds are unknown.

Uses: Plants grown as garden ornamentals and for landscaping.

Cultivation requirements: Easy and vigorously growing; in full sun, normal moisture-retentive to moist with good drainage, but does not tolerate flooding.

Comments:

(1) The general appearance of the Quail clone is strikingly similar to phai liang (×Thyrsocalamus liang), e.g. similar are habit and foliage leaves, young shoots, culms, culm-nodes, and branching complement. Even the culm-leaves resemble phai liang, but they show certain distinguishing features. The sheath has a rounded apex in the Quail clone, not truncate, the indument of the sheath is denser and dark brown in the Quail clone, the auricles are small though quite conspicuous, the ligule is taller but less wide and with an initial whitish laceration. Further differences are the bigger elliptical buds in the Quail clone and the clearly recognizable somewhat larger linear-lanceolate to linear foliage-leaf blades. Another characteristic of the Quail clone, at least in adult clumps that don't grow near other tall plants, is the downward-facing foliage-leaf blade, whereas in Phai Liang the foliage-leaf blades are diffusely exposed. The plants have not yet reached their ultimate culm height and diameter at Bambusetum Baan Sammi. An update to the description of their vegetative characteristics is intended to be provided in 2023 or 2024.

(2) Although the similarities with phai liang (×Thyrsocalamus liang) are obvious, the culm-leaf shows features that hardly would allow considering the Quail clone to be conspecific with phai liang. The culm-leaf of the Quail clone rather resembles species of Gigantochloa. Other features hardly indicate Gigantochloa, such as the small foliage-leaves and deciduous culm-leaves, which are found in some species of Gigantochloa, but mostly their species have large foliage-leaves and persistent or rather late deciduous culm-leaves. One might assume that the Quail clone is a hybrid with one parent from a species of Gigantochloa, but this is merely speculative at the moment.

(3) How did the Quail clone get the botanical name "Bambusa nana"? That designation was made by horticulturists in the United States. How it came about is speculative. When the living bamboo plant was introduced to the United States, probably as a propagule, it was initially small and resembled another species well-known in the United States, namely Bambusa multiplex. At that time, this species was in cultivation under the name Bambusa nana. So gardeners probably assumed that the imported bamboo plant was the same species. Decades later, when US horticulturists discovered Phai Liang in Thailand and imported it to the United States, the similarity of Phai Liang to the Quail clone led horticulturists to apply the name "Bambusa nana" to Phai Liang, too. It was only later perceived that those were not the same species.

(4) The origin of the Quail clone is unknown. The San Diego Botanic Garden informed me in 2018 that there are no records of its origin, but it is strongly suspected that it was imported from Thailand. That assumption was also mentioned by an independent source. In 2018, I found out from online bamboo photos that the Quail clone under the name "Bambusa Nana (Thai Beauty)" was also cultivated in Australia by at least one bamboo nursery (Bamboo Whitsunday, Queensland). Other online bamboo photos from October 2021 from the same nursery show that there are further bamboo plants with a similar appearance under the name "Bambusa Nana", but these most likely represent Phai Liang (×Thyrsocalamus liang). Especially trying to find out where the Quail clone in Australia originally came from, I contacted the nursery (email to B. P., 23 Aug. 2018), but got no answer to my questions. So only speculation remains possible. For example, it would be possible that a long time ago (perhaps towards the end of the last century), the Quail clone and similar bamboos from South-East Asia (not necessarily from Thailand) were brought to Australia, where they were cultivated and distributed. Whether the Quail clone was first brought to Australia and from there to the USA, or vice versa, cannot be ruled out either.

(5) Thailand as the origin of the Quail clone cannot be proven. The Quail clone planted at Bambusetum Baan Sammi (as BS-0436) was received by a nurseryman from the USA in 2010. I never discovered this bamboo anywhere in Thailand. Furthermore, a Thai nurseryman, Mr. Thammarat Boonthammee from Boonthammee Bamboo Garden, Hang Dong, Chiang Mai, told me that he had never come across that bamboo in Thailand, either. He also never found this bamboo pictured or described in posts by Thai online Facebook groups that specialize in bamboo (T. B., pers. comm., Facebook, 6 Oct. 2021).

(6) Based on the assumption that the Quail clone originally came from Thailand, it was speculated that the epithet "nana" was derived from Thai rather than Latin, i.e., a transcription (Romanization) of the Thai adjective นานา, a word, that, depending on the context, can be translated as numerous, various, many, manifold, diversified, different. The Thai word นานา is not uncommon, and can be used in many expressions and have different meanings. One of the conjectures is that a long time ago a foreigner visited the area around นานาพลาซ่า (Nana Plaza) or ห้างนานาสแควร์ (Nana Square) in the Sukhumvit Road area of Bangkok and discovered the Quail clone there, then gave the clone its name "Bambusa nana" and possibly exported the plant to the USA or Australia. However, the area around Nana Plaza or Nana Square is not known as a particularly green area. Rather, one would probably have been able to buy a rare plant at Bangkok's Chatuchak Market (ตลาดนัดจตุจักร), which is also known to foreigners. Another conjecture is that the Quail clone was discovered by a foreigner in one of the Thai bamboo nurseries. There are at least two nurseries specializing in bamboo with a Facebook presence, as well as a single Facebook bamboo group, each with the word นานา (nana) in their name: NANA Bamboo - สวนไผ่นานาพันธุ์ สวน, ขายพันธุ์ไผ่ สวนไผ่นานาพันธุ์, and กลุ่มไผ่นานาพันธุ์ พันธุ์ไผ่นานาชนิด.