Description
Amana kuocangshanica was described by Tan & Hong as a new species and it was found originally on Mount Kuocang, in the Zhejiang Province of south-east China where it grows in bamboo forests or under bushes at an altitude of 600–1100 m in moist places. (The Linnean Society of London, Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society , 2007, 154, 435–442. 2007)
It is said to be most closely related to both A. anhuiensis and A. erythronioides, but it differs in having an oblanceolate lower leaf, the widest point of which is two-thirds of the length from the base. In addition the bulb tunics which are only thinly papery (just papery in related species) are glabrous inside, whilst they are villous or hairy in relatives. The fruit beaks of Amana kuocangshanica are some 5 – 7 mm long. This is in contrast to its closest relative, A. anhuiensis, which has tunics villous inside; the widest position of lower leaf at three-quarters length from the base and a fruit beak 9–13 mm long.
A short stem sits between the leaves (which are deep green and quite shiny) and each carries a solitary, funnel-shaped flower, with three long, thin, bracts sitting on the stem behind the flower. The flowers are white, marked externally with stripes, usually of pink, brown-pink or even brown. Inside a deeper green-brown base to the flowers can be observed.
The bulbs of A. kuocangshanica are very noticeably small, by which I mean really, really small -tiny in fact, even for the genus Amana, which always has small bulbs. The bulb tunics are also very thin, papery and insubstantial so that often the bulbs part company with them and they are bare. When properly stored, this has no negative impact on the bulbs or their subsequent cultivation.
The taxonomy of these Chinese Amana is not easy, the difference are slight and can be affected by cultivation and plant vigour as well as water-supply, shade and humidity. Our plants are cultivated ones, grown for Chinese medicine, but they originated at a nursery near Wenzhou, in Zhejiang province. We are reasonably confident that the identity is correct though we will know more certainly once we have flowered more and grown them for longer, however this is the correct, and only, location for the species. In addition, no other species grow there except A. edulis and this is nothing like edulis!
