Probably linked based on the specimen collection locality and leaf morphology and that no Haemanthus are known from Socotra. If you look at the leaf margins of many Ledebouria at 20-40x they have a distinct series of papillose cells that are unique enough in some species to facilitate identification. The protologue is here; http://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/11456896/… Yes, I agree that the flowers are very unlike the South African Ledebouria and seem really close to some of the odd Scilla species. In the only phylogeny that has this species it comes out in a clade with a Ledebouria without a name and L. nosebeensis, both from Madagascar, and L. hyacinthina from India (which is the type of Ledebouria). I suspect more molecular work will end up splitting all that stuff up into numerous lineages. Aaron On Sunday, December 15, 2013 1:22 PM, Hannon <othonna@gmail.com> wrote: The flowers appear Ledebouria-like to me, albeit more showy than usual. An internet search shows very well an isotype of H. grandifolius, with the broad leaf blades abruptly narrowed to a slender petiole, closely resembling some eriospermums. Haemanthus leaves are broad and truncate at the base (leaf pairs forming a 'seam') although Balfour was likely referring to what we now call Scadoxus, which have leaf blades attenuated at the base. Harry Jans's lovely photo taken in Oct/Nov would be at the beginning of the (main) winter rainy season, with leaves just emerging. Flowers may also appear, perhaps more typically, before the leaves (like Haemanthus). Therefore it is not surprising that the type gathering was sterile (no flowers or fruits) and it was thought to be a Haemanthus rather than a squill. Dylan Hannon On 15 December 2013 09:59, Tim Harvey <zigur@hotmail.com> wrote: > Those plants have rather un-Ledebouria-like flowers, to me. Does anyone > have a copy of the protologue for L. grandifolia? I wonder how they linked > a sterile type specimen to living material? >