New Artificial Hybrids in Chrysalidocarpus (Arecaceae). Part 1. The Tri-Bear Palm: Chrysalidocarpus x leptocaryi

New Artificial Hybrids in Chrysalidocarpus (Arecaceae). Part 1. The Tri-Bear Palm:

Chrysalidocarpus x leptocaryi

DONALD R. HODEL, JUSTEN B. DOBBS, AND ROBERT H. BURTSCHER

Abstract

This article, the first in an occasional series about the hybrid palms in Chrysalidocarpus (Arecaceae) that co-author Justen B. Dobbs is developing in Florida, addresses the tri-bear palm, Chrysalidocarpus × leptocaryi, a stunningly handsome hybrid in tropical and subtropical private collections and botanical gardens. This new hybrid palm is formally named, described, and illustrated, compared to its parents, and its cultivation and landscape use discussed.

Introduction

In 2004, co-author Dobbs viewed a remarkably handsome palm referred to as “triangle-Teddy bear palm” on the website of Daryl O’Connor, an Australian palm collector and grower. The palm, in O’Connor’s Queensland garden, was considered an inadvertent or chance hybrid of Chrysalidocarpus decaryi (triangle palm) and C. leptocheilos (Teddy bear palm) (both then in the genus Dypsis), a hybrid that had likely existed as early as the late 1990s. In addition to the inadvertent appearance of this hybrid in Australia, it might have also existed in the palm breeding program at Nong Nooch Tropical Botanical Gardens in Thailand, a program that is rumored to be no longer extant.

Dobbs was so smitten with this hybrid that he made an intentional attempt to create it in 2004 while living in California, U. S. A. In this first documented intentional attempt, he used Chrysalidocarpus leptocheilos as the staminate or pollen parent and C. decaryi as the pistillate or seed parent but was unsuccessful. Dobbs theorized that C. decaryi likely could not be the seed parent but could serve as the pollen parent (see later for a discussion of this possible phenomenon).

In 2007, Dobbs moved to Florida, U. S. A. and established Seabreeze Nurseries with Derek Batke in Fort Myers on the west coast. In early 2008, Dobbs and Batke, while visiting nurseries in South Florida, again came across inadvertent hybrids of Chrysalidocarpus decaryi and C. leptocheilos at Searle Brothers Nursery and Rainforest Collection in Fort Lauderdale and at Redland Nursery near Miami and brought them to the attention of the nursery owners.

In 2010 and 2011, inspired by the inadvertent hybrids of Chrysalidocarpus decaryi and C. leptocheilos that they had found in South Florida nurseries, they made the first documented, successful, intentional cross of these two species, using C. decaryi as the pollen parent and C. leptocheilos as the seed parent and coined it with the moniker “tri-bear palm.”

Seabreeze Nurseries has been the primary developer of the tri-bear palm and distributes it through two nurseries, one in California and one in Florida. Because the tri-bear palm is becoming more common in palm collections in California, Florida, Australia, and elsewhere, here we formally name, describe, and copiously illustrate it, compare it to its parents, and discuss its landscape use and cultivation. The description is mostly from fresh, non-dried material of the type plant grown in Fullerton, California and supplemented from fresh material in Florida.

Taxonomy

Chrysalidocarpus × leptocaryi Hodel, J. B. Dobbs & R. H. Burtscher sp. hyb. nov. [Chrysalidocarpus leptocheilos (Hodel) Eiserhardt & W. J. Baker × Chrysalidocarpus decaryi (Jum.) Eiserhardt & W. J. Baker]. Type: CULTIVATED. U. S. A., California, Orange County: Fullerton, garden of Robert and Judy Burtscher, 1 September 2025, D. R. Hodel 4083 (Holotype LASCA, Isotype BH).

Diagnosis: Chrysalidocarpus × leptocaryi displays a range of characters with its parents (C. decaryi and C. leptocheilos), some intermediate, a few greater or larger than either parent (heterosis or hybrid vigor), a few lesser or smaller than either parent, a few unique that both parents lack, and some shared with one parent but not the other. For example, this hybrid is intermediate with its parents in trunk diameter, internode length, leaf rachis length, pinnae disposition, peduncular bract length,  and fruit and seed size. Chrysalidocarpus × leptocaryi has characters greater than either parent (hybrid vigor), including leaf base length, pistillode size, and growth rate. In contrast, its inflorescence rachis length is shorter than that of either parent. A unique character of Chrysalidocarpus × leptocaryi that both parents lack is the distally twisted leaf rachis/blade. Some characters it shares with one parent but not the other, including with C. leptocheilos the white-waxy trunk, and the reddish to orangish brown tomentum on the leaf base and peduncular bract; and with C. decaryi the staminate petal length and the bifid eophyll. Table 1 summarizes these and other differences between Chrysalidocarpus × leptocaryi and its parents.

Etymology: Because the pistillate or seed parent is typically listed first and the staminate or pollen parent second in a hybrid name, we have combined the first two syllables of the seed parent epithet leptocheilos and the last two of the staminate parent epithet decaryi to form the hybrid species epithet, leptocaryi.

Habit: Solitary, moderate to robust, monoecious, unarmed, pleonanthic, tree palm to at least 15 m tall.

Trunk/Stem: to at least 10 m tall, 20–30 cm DSH, internodes 8–12 cm, smooth, green with a  waxy-white bloom, leaf scars 1–1.5 cm wide, tan.

Leaves: ca. 12, subtristichous to tristichous, ascending, sometimes twister distally; base/sheath ca. 75 cm long, ca. 73 cm circumference at base where clasping trunk and there 1 cm thick, margins tapering to 7 mm thick at apex, thick-leathery (drying woody), a broad “shoulder” 2.5–3 cm high near apex and just below and on either side of the petiole attachment, abaxially pinkish in proximal 1/3 and overlain with thick, reddish brown tomentum, adaxially smooth, glabrous, pinkish with green distally on either side of petiole attachment; petiole relatively short, 14–16 cm long, ca. 10 cm wide and 7–8 cm thick at base, ca. 7 cm wide and 5–5.5 cm thick at apex, abaxially rounded, adaxially concave and broadly channeled , margins sharp, knife-like, green but overlain with thick, reddish brown tomentum; rachis 3.2–3.3 m long, tapering to 2 mm diam. at apex, abaxially rounded, adaxially shallowly channeled proximally progressively transitioning to a flat, low, broad ridge and then a narrow, knife-like ridge distally, green, abaxially with indument as petiole but transitioning to nearly glabrous at apex, adaxially glabrous; blade 3.4–3.5 m long, ca. 1.5 m wide at mid-blade; rachis/blade conspicuously twisted distally; pinnae 90–92 per side, regular arranged and in same plane on one side, pinnae on the two sides held nearly in the same plane to form a flat blade, rigid, spaced ca, 4 cm apart proximally, 3 cm apart mid-blade, and 2 cm apart distally, most proximal 66–76 × 1.3–1.5 cm, mid-blade largest, 91–95 × 4.25–5 cm, most distal  24–41 ×1.3–1.4 cm, mostly straight, rarely only very slightly and briefly falcate, constricted at attachment point 4–5 mm wide proximally, 1 cm wide mid-blade, 5 mm distally, abaxially and adaxially midrib prominent and elevated, marginal nerves conspicuous, distal marginal nerve swollen, lesser nerves numerous, visible, few to several grayish ramanta on abaxial midrib mostly within about 10–20 cm of rachis, these up to 1 cm long, scurfy.

Inflorescences: 3, interfoliar in flower, inter- or infrafoliar in fruit, 170 × 75 cm, ascending, branched to 3 orders; peduncle ca. 78 cm long, base 50 cm long/wide where clasping but not encircling trunk in its entirety, ca. 10 cm wide and 2.5 cm thick at prophyll attachment, tapering to 5 cm wide and 2.5–3 cm thick at apex, green with scattered reddish brown tomentum; prophyll ca. 58 cm long, ca. equaling most proximal branch, attached XX cm distal of peduncle base, bicarinate, leathery, obliquely open and acute apically, reddish, abaxially with scurfy, relatively long, reddish brown tomentum, adaxially mostly glabrous; peduncular bract ca. 63 cm long, exceeding prophyll and 2 most proximal branches, bicarinate, thin-leathery, obliquely open and acute-acuminate apically, densely covered with relatively long, scurfy, reddish brown tomentum; rachis ca. 90 cam long, tapering to 4 mm diam. at apex, green with scattered, small, reddish brown tomentum; ca. 19 branches and 13 simple rachillae, most proximal branches largest and most complex, to 60 cm long, branches and rachillae subtended by rachis bracts, these low, crescent-shaped but with mucronate center tip to 1.5 cm tall at most proximal branches to barely discernable distally; rachillae 16–17 cm long, 3–3.5 mm diameter at base, tapering to a 2 × 2 mm pointed tip, green, minutely white-spotted.

Flowers: arranged in triads of a center, later-opening pistillate flower flanked on each of two sides by earlier-opening staminate flowers with solitary or paired staminate flowers only in distal 1/5 of rachilla, triads in two spirals, each with 7–8 triads in 1 revolution, triads 4 mm distant within a spiral and spirals 2 mm distant proximally becoming closer distally; triads and solitary and paired staminate flowers in clefts 2 mm long, 3 mm wide, 1 mm deep, proximal lip 0.75 mm high, crescent-shaped, broadly rounded with acute margin or angle; staminate flowers 4 × 2.5 mm, yellow-cream colored; calyx 1.75 × 2.5 mm, cup-like, sepals imbricate nearly to apex and there broadly rounded to truncate, yellowish green; petals 3.5 × 2 mm, ovate, erect and free apically, valvate, creamy yellowish; stamens 3(?), 3.5 mm high, ca. equaling petals, filaments 3.5 mm long, 0.6 mm wide, clear-colored to white, anthers 1 × 0.7 mm, medifixed, white; pistillode large, 4 × 2–2.5 mm, slightly exceeding petals, broadly columnar to conic; pistillate flowers subtended by 1–2 bracteoles, these 0.5 mm high, imbricate, thin, nearly transparent, forming a cup-like structure 1.5 mm wide, light green; individual pistillate flowers 4–4.5 × 3 mm, ovoid; calyx 1.75 × 2–2.5 mm, cup-like, sepals imbricate in proximal 4/5, broadly rounded triangular distally, green; petals 3.5–3.75 × 3–3.5 mm, broadly ovate, imbricate nearly to apex and with a slightly mucronate tip, light green; gynoecium 4 × 2.75 mm, ovoid, white, stigma lobes 3-parted, erect, pointed, slightly exceeding petals.

Fruit: 12–13 × 15–17 mm, globose-ovoid, greenish brown with slight glaucous bloom; seed: 9.5–10 × 13–15 mm, globose-ovoid with a flat spot adjacent to the embryo; endosperm ruminate; eophyll bifid.

Discussion

Co-author Dobbs, who has been making many hybrids in Chrysalidocarpus for about 20 years, feels that most but not all hybrids in the genus are self-sterile. The tri-bear palm is self-sterile; it will not produce viable seeds when self-pollinated, a condition found in many hybrid plants. The reasons for hybrid self-sterility are several and are typically related to the chromosomes of each parent. One of the primary reasons is that the two parents of a hybrid have different chromosome numbers, which means that during meiosis they do not pair correctly, resulting in the failure to produce gametes with the correct number of chromosomes to produce viable offspring (Blackwell 2025, Velos 2022).

However, Dransfield et al. (2008) noted that nearly all species of Chrysalidocarpus (as Dypsis) have a chromosome number of 2n = 32, a common number in subfamily Arecoideae and the predominant number in the tribe Areceae in which Chrysalidocarpus is placed. Thus, differences in chromosome numbers do not seem to be the reason for tri-bear’s self-sterility.

Another possible reason for hybrid sterility is the occurrence of micro- and macro-gene inversions, which reorder the genes, so they do not match up well. Other genetic discrepancies, aberrations, and mutations can also be responsible for self-sterility, and more work is needed to resolve this phenomenon.

Thus, to produce fruits with viable seeds of the tri-bear palm, pollen from another species (not a hybrid) must be used, and pollen from the hybrid’s staminate parent, Chrysalidocarpus decaryi, seems to be the most compatible and effective. However, the resulting offspring will not be an authentic or true tri-bear palm. If authentic tri-bear palm is desired, the original F1 cross must be made (pollen of C. decaryi placed on pistillate flowers of C. leptocheilos).

Through trial and error, Dobbs has also determined that tri-bear hybrids are only successfully produced if the pollen source is Chrysalidocarpus decaryi, not C. leptocheilos. He suspects that, for an unknown reason, C. decaryi has pollen that makes it a successful staminate or pollen parent in a hybrid, a suspicion that is borne out by other hybrids of C. decaryi that Dobbs has made. Similarly, in oil palms (Elaeis guineensis), Criollo-Escobar and Dominguez (2018) found that the genotype of the pollen provider determines pollen quality, especially viability and germinability, which are critical for proper pollination and fruit and seed development. More work is needed to resolve this phenomenon, too.

In a perhaps related phenomenon, staminate flowers of the type plant of the tri-bear palm in co-author Burtscher’s garden in Fullerton, California appear unusually small, misshapen, deformed, and non-functional. They never open fully like those of either parent, abort prematurely, and drop from the inflorescence. The stamens especially are deformed and appear to lack pollen. Thus, at least for the tri-bear palm, the lack of proper development of functional staminate flowers seems to be a barrier to self-compatibility. On the other hand, pistillate flowers of the type plant appear to be normal and other hybrids in co-author Dobbs’s nursery, such as Chrysalidocarpus pembanus x C. decaryi, have been successfully made with pollen from C. leptocheilos to make a three-way hybrid.

The tri-bear palm displays a range of characters with its parents, some intermediate, a few greater or larger than either parent (heterosis or hybrid vigor), a few lesser or smaller than either parent, one unique that both parents lack, and some shared with one parent but not the other. An unusual but inconsistent tri-bear character is that sometimes leaves on young, trunkless plants emerge bright red (Fig. X). The earlier diagnosis and Table 1 summarize critical character differences between the tri-bear palm and its parents.

 

Table 1. Summary of critical character differences between Chrysalidocarpus × leptocaryi (tri-bear palm) and its two parents: C. decaryi and C. leptocheilos^z.

Character	C. decaryi	C. × leptocaryi	C. leptocheilos
Trunk
Diam. standard height (cm)	30–40	20–30	25
Internode length(cm)/color	3–10/gray	8–12/white waxy	12/white-waxy
Leaf
Leaf base length (cm)	30–45	75	62
Indument	white waxy with reddish pubescence	reddish brown tomentum	rusty brown tomentum
Rachis length (m)	2.2–3	3.3–3.4	4
Blade twisted distally	no	yes	no
Pinnae disposition	ascending	flat	slightly drooping
Inflorescence
Position	interfoliar	interfoliar then infrafoliar	infrafoliar
Peduncular bract length        (cm)	40–55	63	70
Peduncular bract indument	scattered scales	reddish brown tomentum	reddish brown tomentum
Rachis length (cm)	118	90	100
Flowers
Staminate color	yellow to orange	yellow to yellow-cream	yellow
Pistillate color	green	green  with white gynoecium	green
Staminate petals (mm)	3.2–3.5 × 1.8–2.3	3.5 × 2	2 × 1.5–1.75
Pistillode (mm)	1.6 × 1	4 × 2–2.5	1.75–2
Fruit
Size (mm)/shape	15–22 × 12–19 mm/ovoid to subglobose	12–13 × 15–17 mm/globose-ovoid	10–12 mm diam., globose
Seed size (mm)/shape	17–19 × 16–18 mm/subglobose to ellipsoid	9.5–10 × 13–15 mm/ globose-ovoid	8.5–10 × 8.5–9 mm/ globose
Eophyll	bifid	bifid	pinnate

^zCharacters for both parents taken mostly from Dransfield and Beentje (1995).

On the occasion that flowers of Chrysalidocarpus × leptocaryi self-pollinate, it develops fruit that inexorably aborts when about 0.5 cm in diameter, being either parthenocarpic or containing brown endosperm void of any embryo.

The tri-bear palm clearly exhibits hybrid vigor, surpassing both parents in its growth rate. Once trunk forms in California, it produces about three leaves and 30 to 35 cm of trunk annually until flowering commences, at which time trunk production slows slightly because internodes become shorter. Growth rates can be greater in tropical regions with year-round warmth. Under optimal summer growing conditions, growth can be phenomenal, with new leaves and attendant trunk seemingly telescoping vigorously upwards out of the top. Indeed, growth is so vigorous that the new leaves, including their bases and the even newer leaves ensconced within them, sometimes list or lean slightly in one direction. This trunk listing or leaning likely occurs because the rapid, heavy, new leaf and trunk growth cannot completely support itself. Hodel (201) and Tomlinson (1990, 2006) discussed the phenomenon of palm trunks or stems strengthening as they age. The hardest, strongest tissues are in the proximal portions of the trunk, which are the oldest, while the softest, weaker tissues are in the distal portions of the trunk, which are the youngest. Thus, the young, soft tissues of the new growth have not yet attained anywhere near their maximum strength and can be subject to listing or leaning. We have noticed this phenomenon with other hybrids in Chrysalidocarpus.

Another possible byproduct of hybridization in tri-bear palms in California is the yellow and brown splotching that appears on lower or older leaves in the canopy. This splotching is more evident with a back-lit leaf. One’s first inclination might be to diagnosis this splotching as a nutrient disorder, such as potassium deficiency, and, indeed, these symptoms can fit this disorder. Another explanation could be lesion mimic mutants, which are a result of the hybridization process and can become sufficiently severe to kill some palms, such as the mule palm (×Butiagrus nabonnandii) (Dhillon et al. 2024). Lesion mimic mutants do not respond to fertilizer or pesticide and fungicide applications because they are the result of genetic anomalies in the hybridization process.

That tri-bear hybrids were being inadvertently produced in palm collections and nurseries in Australia as early as the late 1990s and later in Florida is more evidence that supports the possibility or even likelihood that cultivated collections of numerous, closely related palm species might be a source of hybrid progeny unless pollen-exclusion techniques are employed, rather than being a typically, long-touted method to perpetuate and conserve species and genetic material. This inadvertent, undocumented, and mostly unwanted hybridization, to which Hodel (2023, 2025) alluded, is worrisome and disconcerting. While hybrids can expand and enhance our palette of landscape palms, we feel that they should be well documented, typified, described, and supported with meticulous notes, photographs, and records.

In Chrysalidocarpus, inadvertent hybrids seem to occur in South Florida in the most commonly cultivated species, such as C. lutescens, which is grown by the millions for the nursery and landscape trades in Florida and for export. J & K Plant Distributors in Miami, Florida reported in 2024 (pers. comm.) that C. lutescens and C. decaryi will occasionally and inadvertently hybridize in their nursery; the hybridized nature of some open-pollinated, seed-grown plants will become evident as they grow and develop. These occasional hybrids are seen as a novelty by some nursery growers and sold to local collectors while others simply sell them unknowingly as “pure” species.

Cultivation

For comprehensive reviews of palm horticulture and landscape management, see Broschat et al. (2014) and Hodel (2012).

Tri-bear palms seem well adapted to a variety of subtropical and tropical climates and regions around the world. They seem adapted to tropical and warm subtropical, moist to wet conditions, like those of southern Florida, northern Australia, Thailand, and elsewhere. They are tolerant and grow unusually well in warm or slightly cooler, drier, and more arid subtropical conditions, like the Mediterranean-climate regions of southern California, southern Europe, southern Africa, parts of Australia, and elsewhere. One of tri-bear’s parents, Chrysalidocarpus decaryi, likely imparts heat, cool, drought, wind, and arid tolerance to tri-bear palms. Despite this drought tolerance, tri-bear palms perform best with occasional irrigation during dry, rainless periods (see later).

Tri-bear palms will tolerate hot temperatures, likely as warm as 45 C, especially if given some afternoon shade and occasional irrigation. They will also tolerate short, overnight periods of near-freezing and slightly sub-freezing temperatures to   ̄2 C with little or no damage.

Propagation of tri-bear palms is by seed, which can be produced on Chrysalidocarpus leptocheilos whose pistillate flowers are pollinated with pollen from C. decaryi. Measures should be taken to emasculate the inflorescence. Remove staminate flowers of C. leptocheilos pre-anthesis to exclude unwanted pollen, which is critical to maximize hybrid fruit production and prevent self-pollination. To remove staminate flowers mechanically, simply rub them off with your fingers beginning at the distal end of each rachilla and moving toward the proximal end. Removal should be done well before staminate anthesis to eliminate the chance of stray pollen escaping the flower during removal and lodging on the pistillate flower. It is helpful to start by cutting off  or removing the distal portion of each rachilla, which  contains only solitary or paired staminate flowers anyway and no pistillate flowers. Then remove the staminate flowers in triads with a pistillate flower in the more  proximal portion of the rachilla. Be careful not to damage pistillate flowers when removing staminate flowers. After removal of staminate flowers, spray the entire inflorescence with a mixture of water, a denaturing agent, and a surfactant to wash off any escape pollen. Also, the now emasculated inflorescence must be protected to exclude unwanted, foreign pollen spread by wind and/or insects from adjacent or nearby individuals of Chrysalidocarpus, which can be done by emasculating or removing inflorescences on other palms or enclosing securely the just emasculated inflorescence in a protective bag of cheesecloth, poly screen mesh, or specialized pollination bags used in the date and oil palm industries. The poly mesh bags also provide protection of the developing fruits against marauding herbivores.

When fruits are mature and soft ripe, they can be collected from the palm, cleaned of their pulp, and planted in a clean, moist, porous, well aerated medium composed of about 25% organic matter like peatmoss or coir and 75% inorganic matter like perlite, pumice, or sand. Plant the seeds, barely covering them with about 5 to 10 mm of medium. Place the clean, planted containers off the ground and keep them clean. Keep the medium moist but not soggy wet and maintain temperatures of from 24 to 32 C.

When the first eophyll has appeared, pot up seedlings into appropriately sized, clean containers using the same or similar mix used for germination, only now incorporate dolomite lime and a palm-special fertilizer into the mix following recommended rates. Keep plants off the ground and in light shade, especially in the afternoon. As root fill out their containers, move up young plants into larger containers and gradually decrease any shade until they are in full sun. Keep the potting medium evenly moist.

When the plants are of sufficient size, they can be planted out into the ground. Tri-bear palms perform well in just about any type of soil, from the clays, sandy loams, and decomposed granites of southern California to the limestone soils of Florida, as long as the soil environment is managed properly, especially as it pertains to irrigation.

Situate tri-bear palms in full sun or with some light, afternoon shade in the hottest, driest regions. Dig a whole as deep as the root ball is high and twice as wide. Place an appropriate amount of palm-special fertilizer in the bottom of the hole. Remove the container and place the palm in the hole. Backfill with the same soil that was dug out of the hole without amending it, tamp firmly, apply about five cm of good quality mulch from the palm’s stem out to 60 cm, and irrigate thoroughly. If rain is insufficient, irrigate when the palm needs it by checking the original root ball, backfill, and surrounding site soil. Whichever one of these zones first dries out at a depth of about three to five cm under the soil surface (not counting the mulch), then immediately apply sufficient water to moisten the upper 30  cm of the root zone. Irrigate again only when the root zone dries out again to a depth of three to five cm and continue this irrigation regimen. Fertilize with a palm-special fertilize following label recommendations.

Tri-bear palms are sufficiently handsome and imposing to make a statement in any landscape. Their whitish trunk, reddish fuzzy crownshaft, and splendid canopy of dark green leaves is sure to draw attention. Its appearance is sufficiently powerful to stand alone as a single specimen or for added emphasis, plant three or five well spaced individuals in a group. Companion plants should be kept at least 60 cm away from the trunk and low, so as not to hide or obscure the handsome, colorful trunk.

We feel that tri-bear palms have their maximum appeal and ornamental value when they have just initiated flowering and have about three to four m of trunk. They will continue to reward for many more years, but then unusually tall specimens tend to lose some of their allure and replacement becomes a consideration.

Literature Cited

Blackwell. 2025. What is hybrid speciation? https://www.blackwellpublishing.com/ridley/tutorials/Speciation12.asp  Accessed: 3 October 2025.

Broschat, T. K., D. R. Hodel, and M. L. Elliott. 2014. Ornamental Palms: Biology and Horticulture. Horticultural Reviews 42: 1–121.

Criollo-Escobar, H. and J. J. Dominguez. 2018. Germinability and pollen viability of four improved cultivars of palm oil under laboratory conditions. Revista Facultad Nacional de Agronomía 71(1): 8395–8405. http://www.revistas.unal.edu.co/index.php/refame  DOI: 10.15446/rfna.v71n1.69587  

Dhillon, B., L. Altarugio, S. Chakrabarti, and K. Bansal. 2024. Suspected lesion mimic mutants in mule palms (×Butiagrus nabonnandii). Palms 68: 125–132.

Dransfield, J. and H. Beentje. 1995. The Palms of Madagascar. Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, U. K. and the International Palm Society, U. S. A.

Dransfield, J, N. W. Uhl, C. B. Asmussen, W. J. Baker, M. H. Madelina, and C. E. Lewis. 2008. Genera Palmarum. The Evolution and Classification of Palms. Kw Publishing, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, United Kingdom.

Hodel, D. R. 2012. The Biology and Management of Landscape Palms. The Britton Fund, Inc. Western Chapter of the International Society of Arboriculture, Porterville, California.

Hodel, D. R. 2023. Chrysalidocarpus blackii (Arecaceae) (:) a new species from cultivation. PalmArbor 2023-05: 1–30. https://ucanr.edu/sites/default/files/2025-03/Chrysalidocarpus%20blackii%20PalmArbor%20FINAL.pdf  DOI: https://doi.org/10.21414/B18G67 

Hodel, D. R. 2025. Chrysalidocarpus hamannii (Arecaceae): a splendid new species from cultivation. PalmArbor 2025-12: 1–40. https://ucanr.edu/sites/default/files/2025-09/Chrysalidocarpus%20hamannii%20PalmArbor%20FINAL%2029%20Sept%202025.pdf  DOI: https://doi.org/10.21414/B1DS3F 

Tomlinson, P. B. 1990. The Structural Biology of Palms. Oxford University Press, New York.

Tomlinson, P. B. 2006. The uniqueness of palms. Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society 151: 4–14.

Velos, L. 2022. Why are hybrid plants sterile? https://www.sciencing.com/plant-hybrids-sterile-5619428/  Accessed: 3 October 2025.

__________________________

Donald R. Hodel is the emeritus landscape horticulture advisor for the University of California Cooperative Extension in Los Angeles and specializes in the taxonomy, selection, and management of palms and trees. drhodel@ucanr.edu

 

Justen B. Dobbs is a Florida nursery owner specializing in producing and growing hybrid palms, especially of the genus Chrysalidocarpus and including the tri-bear palm. justen.seabreeze@gmail.com

 

Robert “Bob” H. Burtscher is a keen and discerning collector of palms, cycads, and companion plants in Fullerton, California, who has numerous tri-bear palms in his collection, including the type plant. rhburtscher@gmail.com

___________________________

 

Text © 2025 by Donald R. Hodel, Justen B. Dobbs, and Robert H. Burtscher.

Photographs © 2025 by Donald R. Hodel unless noted otherwise.

Publication Date: 15 October 2025.

PalmArbor: https://ucanr.edu/site/hodel-palms-and-trees/palmarbor

ISSN 269083245

Editor-In-Chief: Donald R. Hodel

Hodel Palms and Trees: https://ucanr.edu/site/hodel-palms-and-trees