New Artificial Hybrids in Chrysalidocarpus

 (Arecaceae). Part 3. The Golden-Triangle Palm:

Chrysalidocarpus x lutecaryi

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

Abstract

This article, the third in an occasional series about hybrid palms in Chrysalidocarpus (Arecaceae) that co-author Justen B. Dobbs is developing in Florida, U. S. A., addresses the golden-triangle palm, Chrysalidocarpus × lutecaryi (C. lutescens × C. decaryi), another handsome hybrid entering tropical and subtropical private collections and botanical gardens that is likely to become more popular in the trade. Thus, this new hybrid palm is formally named, described, and illustrated, compared to its parents, and its cultivation and landscape use discussed.

Introduction

We (Hodel at al. 2025, 2026b) recently discussed co-author Dobbs’s interest in producing hybrid palms, especially in the genus Chrysalidocarpus. In these articles, we named, described, discussed, and illustrated the tri-bear palm, a hybrid of C. leptocheilos and C. decaryi, and the tri-bana palm, a hybrid of C. pembanus and C. decaryi, that Dobbs has championed and produced, and are now gracing collections and landscapes in Florida, California, and elsewhere.

Through his Seabreeze Nurseries in Fort Myers, Florida, Dobbs has been making numerous other Chrysalidocarpus hybrids, some of which have matured and will come into production. One of these is the golden-triangle palm, C. × lutecaryi (Fig. 1).

Dobbs is the developer of the golden-triangle  palm and will distribute it through two nurseries, one in California and one in Florida. Because the golden-triangle palm will become more common in palm collections in California, Florida, 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 at Dobb’s home in Fort Myers, Florida.

 

1. Co-author Justen Dobbs stands next to the type plant of the golden-triangle palm, Chrysalidocarpus × lutecaryi, in his garden. All photos are © D. R. Hodel and of the type plant, Hodel 4086.

Taxonomy

Chrysalidocarpus × lutecaryi Hodel, J. B. Dobbs & R. H. Burtscher sp. hyb. nov. [Chrysalidocarpus lutescens H. Wendl. × Chrysalidocarpus decaryi (Jum.) Eiserhardt & W. J. Baker]. Type: CULTIVATED. U. S. A., Florida, Lee County: Fort Myers, garden of Justen Dobbs, 24 April 2026, D. R. Hodel 4086 (Holotype LASCA, Isotype BH). Figs. 1–XX.

Diagnosis: Chrysalidocarpus × lutecaryi displays a range of characters with its parents (C. decaryi and C. lutescens), some greater or smaller or otherwise unique from its parents, some shared with one parent but not the other, or some it shares with both parents. For example, the type plant of this hybrid is unique from its parents in its hybrid vigor; the larger and longer leaf base, petiole, peduncle, inflorescence and inflorescence rachis; leaf rachis with minute, white-waxy scales with reddish brown centers, reddish brown tomentose peduncle and peduncular bract; and the inflorescence rachis with lightly scattered, minute, tan scales and reddish brown indument. It shares with C. decaryi the quantity of leaves per stem, leaf rachis length and color and the quantity of pinnae on each side of the rachis. With C. lutescens it shares the yellowish leaf base and moderately ascending pinnae. It is intermediate between both parents in the quantity of stems, stem diameter, and petiole indumentum (Table 1).

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 lutescens and the last two of the staminate parent epithet decaryi to form the hybrid species epithet, lutecaryi.

Common Name: golden-triangle palm, the “golden” derived from one of the common names of the pistillate parent, the golden cane palm (Chrysalidocarpus lutescens), and the “triangle” from the common name of the staminate parent, triangle palm C. decaryi).

Habit: Clustered with at  ca. 3 stems, moderate to robust, monoecious, unarmed, pleonanthic, tree palm, forming clumps to at least 12 m tall and 7–10 m wide (Fig. 1).

Trunks/Stems: to at least 9 m tall, ca. 26 cm DSH, ringed, internodes ca. 7.5 cm, smooth, green with white-waxy indument distally, tan proximally, leaf scars ca. 1 cm wide, tan, swollen at base  (Fig. 2).

Leaves: 16–21 per stem, pinnate, strongly tristichous, ascending-spreading, straight to very slightly arcuate but slightly recurved in distal 1 m (Fig. 3); base/sheath ca. 80 cm long, ca. 60 cm circumference,  briefly tubular proximally, deeply open distally and there typically with a discernable, low, rounded “shoulder” to 3 cm high, thick-leathery (drying woody),  abaxially light green medially to greenish golden-yellow laterally and proximally, overlain with conspicuous white-waxy indument and variably dense, ragged, scurfy tufts of reddish brown tomentum, the latter especially distally at petiole, adaxially yellow-orange; petiole 40–55 cm long, ca. 5 cm thick and wide at base, ca. 4 cm thick and 2.5 cm wide at apex, rounded and light green abaxially with white-waxy, irregularly rounded scales with minute, reddish brown centers, reddish brown tomentum proximally extending from leaf base, shallowly channeled adaxially with white-waxy bloom, margins sharp; rachis ca. 2.9 m long, ca. 4 × 2.5 cm at base, tapering to 1 mm diam. at apex, mostly straight to very slightly arcuate but recurved in distal 1 m, abaxially rounded and laterally with white-waxy, irregularly rounded scales with minute, reddish brown centers especially proximally but transitioning to nearly glabrous at apex, adaxially shallowly channeled proximally progressively transitioning to a flat, low, broad ridge and then a narrow, knife-like ridge distally, green but with a white waxy bloom especially proximally; pinnae ca. 70 per side, regularly arranged , moderately ascending off rachis to form a V-shaped blade in transverse section with an interior angle of 90–120°, spaced 9–15 cm apart proximally, ca. 3.5 cm apart mid-blade, and 1–1.5 cm apart distally, pinnae slightly imbricate ca. mid-blade to apex, most proximal 109–148 × 1–2.2 cm, proximal mid-blade ca. 106 × 3 cm, most distal  ca. 9 × 0.5 cm, all leathery, stiff, straight but drooping proximally, adaxially dark green, abaxially green with very light white-waxy indument and minute, granular, whitish spots, constricted at attachment point to ca. 1 cm wide, adaxially midrib and distal marginal vein of each pinna greenish yellow, elevated, proximal marginal vein only slightly conspicuous, especially abaxially, 4–5 primary veins on either side of midrib adaxially and to a lesser extent abaxially, veins of lesser orders very faint adaxially and abaxially, abaxially midrib and primary veins with minute, dark scales, ca. 5 ramenta on abaxial midrib mostly within ca. 10 cm of rachis, these 5–12 mm long, tan, scurfy.

Inflorescences: 4–5 per stem, interfoliar in flower and fruit, only portion distal of leaf base accessible, this portion ca. 1.9 × 1.35 m (portion proximal of leaf base estimated ca. 80 cm long, giving total inflorescence length ca. 2.7 m), ascending, spreading, branched to 3 orders; peduncle portion distal of leaf base ca. 32 cm long (portion proximal of leaf base estimated ca. 80 cm long giving total peduncle length ca. 112 cm), ca. 5.5 ×  2.5 cm at 2^nd peduncular bract attachment, green but with lightly scattered, minute, tan scales and reddish brown tomentum; prophyll not seen; 1^st peduncular bract only distal portion seen, this ca. 54 cm long, white-waxy with reddish brown tomentum; 2^nd peduncular bract rudimentary, incompletely encircling peduncle, ca. 5 × 8 cm; rachis ca. 1.4 m long, tapering to ca. 5 × 4 mm at apex; ca. 22 branches and 13 simple rachillae, most proximal branches largest and most complexly branched, most proximal branch ca. 1 m long, sub-peduncle ca. 17 × 4 × 1 cm, sub-rachis ca. 54 cm long with ca. 7 branches and 14 simple rachillae, most proximal sub-branch largest, ca. 40 cm long, sub-sub-peduncle ca. 4 cm long, ca. 1 × 0.7 cm at base, tapering to ca. 8 mm diam. at apex, sub-sub rachis ca. 2 cm long, ca. 5 mm diam., indument as in peduncle but becoming mostly glabrous at distal extremes; branches and rachillae subtended by rachis bracts, most proximal largest, these ca. 6 cm wide and 5 mm high except for central, median tip to ca. 8 cm long, this median tip lanceolate, dagger-like, bracts becoming smaller distally, eventually barely  discernable distally;  rachillae ca. 32 cm long, ca. 5 × 4 mm at base, tapering to ca. 2–3 mm diam. at apex, spreading, light green at pistillate anthesis.

Flowers: arranged in triads of a center, later-opening pistillate flower flanked on each of two sides by earlier-opening staminate flowers, triads (or a dyad of a staminate and a pistillate flower) nearly throughout rachilla length, solitary or dyad of staminate flowers only in distal 1/30–1/10 (1–3 cm) of rachilla, triads and dyads in two spiraling rows with 5–6 triads or dyads in 1 revolution, triads or dyads ca. 5 mm distant within a spiral proximally and 2–3 mm distant distally, rows 1–3 mm apart, triads or dyads in dried state in shallow clefts ca. 3 mm long, 2.75 mm wide, and 0.5 mm deep, proximal lip prominent (when dry), 1.25 × 2 mm, crescent-shaped, broadly ovate, ascending to ca. 90°, thicker proximally, thin and knife-like distally along margins, bracteoles ca. 1 × 1.25 mm, crescent-shaped, imbricate, thin, white, truncate to slightly rounded-truncate distally; staminate flowers (not seen); pistillate flowers 4.5–5.5 × 3–3.25 mm, ovoid, greenish yellow to yellow; calyx ca. 2 × 3–3.25 mm, crown-like, sepals bowl-like, imbricate in proximal half, rounded apically, yellow with narrow, whitish margins, corolla ca. 4 × 3 mm, petals triangular, slightly bowl-like, imbricate in proximal 3/4, rounded-triangular to triangular apically, yellow to greenish yellow with narrow, whitish margins; gynoecium exserted ca. 1.7 mm above petals, 4–4.5 × 2.5–3 mm, ovary ovoid, clear-colored, stigma lobes 3, clearly differentiated, erect to slightly spreading, clear-colored, margins papillose.

Fruit: (immature) ca. 7 × 4 mm, oblong-obovoid, green; eophyll bifid.

Discussion

Chrysalidocarpus × lutecaryi  can be more like C. decaryi, its staminate parent, or closer to C. lutescens, its pistillate parent, as progeny within a grex typically “lean” more towards one of the parents although progeny can be within an intermediate range between both parents. Nonetheless, C. × lutecaryi  typically has a sparingly clustered habit; in fact, most larger specimens in Florida and California have no more than three trunks.  Thus, they do not produce as many trunks as C. lutescens but more than C. decaryi, which, of course, is a solitary species.  It is possible that a small percentage of golden-triangle specimens could remain solitary if they were to inherit the solitary trait of C. decaryi, but this has not yet been observed. 

The leafy canopy of Chrysalidocarpus × lutecaryi  is similar to that of C. decaryi. Indeed, the type specimen of C. × lutecaryi can be likened to a clustered C. decaryi. The leaf canopies of both are grayish, their leaf rachises are mostly straight except becoming moderately recurved in the distal one m or so, and their thick, sturdy, open leaf bases are similar in shape, color, and indument. However, the discerning eye might detect that the leaf canopy of C. × lutecaryi is less gray than that of C. × pembacaryi and C. decaryi. The pinnae of C. × pembacaryi are so steeply ascending off the rachis that the abaxial pinna surface, which has a light coating of white-waxy scales, is prominently displayed, enhancing its gray leaf color; these conditions are less so for C. × lutecaryi.

Minute, brown scales line the veins on the abaxial pinna surface. These are inconspicuous on fresh material, even under magnification, because they are obscured by the white-waxy scales but are conspicuous and readily viewed in dry material under magnification, perhaps because the heat of the drying process melted or altered the waxy scales, revealing the brown scales lining the veins.

Chrysalidocarpus × lutecaryi holds an astounding quantity of leaves per stem, up to 21, so much so that we were unable to remove an inflorescence in its entirety for closer study without removing an inordinate quantity of living leaves and their bases, perhaps damaging the plant. Thus, we were relegated to removing only the portion of the inflorescence that was exserted beyond the subtending leaf base, which prohibited us from accessing most of the peduncle, prophyll, and peduncular bract.

Chrysalidocarpus × lutecaryi is similar to C. × pembacaryi, especially in habit. However, it can be distinguished from the latter with a number of characters, including slightly more leaves per stem; variably dense (vs. dense) reddish brown tomentum on the leaf base; longer petiole but shorter leaf rachis, both with irregularly round, white-way scales with minute, reddish brown centers (vs. reddish brown tomentum only); slightly fewer pinnae per each side of the rachis; moderately (vs. steeply) ascending pinnae; inflorescence branched to three (vs. four) orders; peduncle with sparsely scattered, minute, tan scales and reddish brown tomentum (vs. reddish brown tomentum only); shorter inflorescence rachis; and rachis with minute, tan scales, and reddish brown indument (vs. reddish brown indument only (Table 2).

Seedlings of Chrysalidocarpus × lutecaryi  are extremely difficult to discern from those of both parents, even for an experienced collector, mainly because both parents produce seedlings with bifid eophylls.  Key hybrid traits can be seen once plants have 2-3 first leaves, at which point there is a discernable amount of red or pink on the stem, a trait that is absent in pure C. lutescens. They some- times have conspicuous tristichous leaf arrangements at this size but it depends on how much C. decaryi parentage was passed on in the hybrid. 

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 golden-triangle 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 chromo- somes of each parent. One of the primary reasons is that the two parents of a hybrid have differ- ent 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 dominant number in the tribe Arecaceae in which Chrysalidocarpus is placed. Thus, differences in chromosome numbers do not seem to be the reason for golden-triangle palm’s self-sterility.

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

Thus, to produce fruits with viable seeds on the golden-triangle palm, pollen from another spe- cies (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 golden-triangle palm but a back-crossed hybrid, which Dobbs has also produced but in extremely low quantities. If authentic golden-triangle palm is desired, the origi- nal F1 cross must be made (pollen of C. decaryi placed on pistillate flowers of C. lutescens).

Through trial and error, Dobbs has also determined that golden-triangle palm hybrids are only successfully produced if the pollen source is Chrysalidocarpus decaryi, not C. lutescens. He sus- pects 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. Dobbs theorizes that the hot, dry, and relatively brutal habiat of C. decaryi in Mada- gascar creates unique environmental demands that require a longer window of pollen viability and greater incidence of survivability, thus improving its efficacy in pollinating neighboring C. decaryi. The pollen’s unique shape and size, coupled with a superlative window of viability might render it more compatible as a pollen donor for other Chrysalidocarpus sp. These pollen proper- ties could be likened to the way a skeleton-key is able to open many locks whereas a standard key only works in one lock. Similarly, in oil palms (Elaeis guineensis), Criollo-Escobar and Dominguez (2018) found that the genotype of the pollen provider determines pollen quality, es- pecially viability and germinability, which are critical for proper pollination and fruit and seed development. More work is needed to resolve this phenomenon.

Attesting to its lengthy pollen viability, Dobbs once emasculated the inflorescence (by hand) of a Chrysalidocarpus decaryi at the beginning of staminate anthesis but failed to treat the immature and later-opening pistillate flowers with a denaturing agent. The pistillate flowers opened three to four weeks later but surprisingly were still fertilized by remnant pollen and later developed into fruits with viable seeds. Thus, C. decaryi pollen might be viable for up to three to four weeks or more, whereas most other Chrysalidocarpus sp. have a pollen viability window closer to four to seven days at typical outdoor temperatures and conditions. The reason that C. decaryi fails as a pistillate (seed) parent in hybridization might be its pistillate flowers are incompatible witb pol- len from other species, which might prove to be an interesting study.

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

The golden-triangle palm clearly exhibits hybrid vigor, surpassing both parents in its growth rate in Florida. Another possible byproduct of hybridization in golden-triangle palms is yellow and brown splotching that might appear on lower or older leaves in the canopy. This splotching is more evident with a backlit leaf. One’s first inclination might be to diagnosis this splotching as a nutrient disorder, such as potassium deficiency (Broschat et al. 2014, Hodel 2012), and, indeed,

these symptoms can fit this potential disorder. Another explanation could be lesion mimic mu- tants, 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. While we suspect that lesion mimic mu- tant might occur on the tri-bear palm, Chrysalidocarpus × leptocaryi (see Hodel at al. 2025 for illustrations), fortunately, we have not yet observed this yellow and brown splotching on older leaves of the golden-triangle palm yet.

Because hybrids can be inadvertently produced in palm collections and nurseries with species- rich holdings of Chrysalidocarpus (and likely other genera) (Hodel 2023, 2025; 2026a; 2026b; Ho- del et al. 2025), foreign pollen-exclusion techniques must be employed to ensure “pure” offspring are produced under such conditions. Otherwise, instead of being a typically, long-touted method to perpetuate and conserve species and genetic material, cultivation could result in just the op- posite, inadvertent, largely undocumented, and mostly unwanted hybridization, diluting and mix- ing genetic material (Hodel 2023, 2025; Hodel and Burtscher 2025; Hodel et al. 2025, 2026a, 2026b).

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 land- scape 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 grow- ers 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).

Although experiences cultivating golden-triangle palms are few, they would seem well adapted to a variety of subtropical and tropical climates and regions around the world. The golden-triangle hybrid is 3x faster-growing than Chrysalidocarpus xLeptocaryi or Chrysalidocarpus xPembcaryi in South Florida and about 2x as fast in Southern California.  For example, in South Florida one golden-triangle seedling with superlative growth went from sewn seed to 18 inches (45cm) tall in just 10 months! They would seem adapted to tropical and warm subtropical, moist to wet conditions, like those of southern Florida, northern Australia, Thailand, and elsewhere. They would likely be 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 golden-triangle palm’s parents, Chrysalidocarpus decaryi, likely imparts heat, cool, drought, wind, and arid tolerance to golden-triangle palms. Golden-triangle palm’s seed parent, C. lutescens, naturally inhabits exposed, scrubby forest on sandy, rocky, often calcareous substrates near the sea, which likely imparts tolerance of wind, alkaline soil conditions, and drought. Despite this drought tolerance, golden-triangle palms perform best with occasional irrigation during dry, rainless periods (see later).

Golden-triangle 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 golden-triangle palms is by seed, which can be produced on Chrysalidocarpus lutescens whose pistillate flowers are pollinated with pollen from C. decaryi. Measures should be taken to emasculate the inflorescence. Remove staminate flowers of C. lutescens 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 escaped 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 pistillate flowers of C. lutescens have attained anthesis, which typically can be determined by petal and pistil color and sometimes the presence of a minute, clear dew-drop at the tip of the pistil, pollen collected from C. decaryi can be applied. Make repeated applications of pollen to the pistillate flowers of C. lutescens over several days to ensure successful pollination.

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. Golden-triangle palms perform well in just about any type of soil as long as the soil environment is managed properly, especially as it pertains to irrigation.

Situate golden-triangle palms in full sun or with some light, afternoon shade in the hottest, driest regions. Provide sufficient space from adjacent palms and other plants and buildings to account for the eventual size of golden tringle palms. Otherwise, nearby plants and building will physically clash with the golden-triangle palm, detracting from their beauty and visual impact.

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. Yellow and dark splotching might sometimes occur on older or lower leaves in the canopy of golden-triangle palms, which could indicate potassium deficiency or potentially the lesion mimic mutant disorder discussed earlier.

Golden-triangle palms are sufficiently handsome and imposing to make a statement in any landscape. Their clustering habit, moderately robust trunk, reddish fuzzy crownshaft, and splendid canopy of grayish-looking  leaves are sure to draw attention. Because it typically but sparsely clusters and is an unusually attractive palm, it is sufficiently powerful to stand alone as a single specimen. 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 golden-triangle 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 

Hodel, D. R. and R. H. Burtscher. 2025. Chrysalidocarpus andersenii and C. × lafazamanga (Arecaceae): a new species and its hybrid from cultivation. PalmArbor 2025-15: 1–46. https://ucanr.edu/sites/default/files/2025-10/Chrysalidocarpus%20andersenii%20and%20C%20x%20lafazamanga%20PalmArbor%20FINAL%2024%20Oct%202025%20.pdf  DOI: https://doi.org/10.21414/B11G62 

Hodel, D. R., J. B. Dobbs, and R. H. Burtscher. 2025. New artificial hybrids in Chrysalidocarpus (Arecaceae). Part 1. The tri-bear palm: Chrysalidocarpus × leptocaryi. 2025-13: 1–40. https://ucanr.edu/sites/default/files/2025-10/Chrysalidocarpus%20x%20leptocaryi%20%20tri-bear%20palm%20PalmArbor%20FINAL%2013%20October%202025.pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.21414/B1901T   

Hodel, D. R., J. B. Dobbs, and R. H. Burtscher. 2026a. ×Wodyetchi bifurcina (Arecaceae), a new hybrid genus and species from cultivation of Wodyetia bifurcata and Veitchia arecina. PalmArbor 2026-03: 1–52.  https://ucanr.edu/sites/default/files/2026-03/Wodyetchia%20PalmArbor%20FINAL-2.pdf  DOI: https://doi.org/10.21414/B1M881

Hodel, D. R., J. B. Dobbs and R. H. Burtscher. 2026b. New artificial hybrids in Chrysalidocarpus (Arecaceae). Part 2. The tri-bana palm: Chrysalidocarpus × pembacaryi  PalmArbor 2026-06: 1–52.   https://ucanr.edu/sites/default/files/2026-05/Chrysalidocarpus%20x%20pembacaryi%20tri-bana%20palm%20PalmArbor%2027%20May%202026-AC.pdf  DOI: https://doi.org/10.21414/B1730V

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 golden-triangle 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 several of Dobbs’s Chrysalidocarpus hybrids in his collection. rhburtscher@gmail.com

___________________________

 

Text © 2026 by Donald R. Hodel, Justen B. Dobbs, and Robert H. Burtscher.

Photographs © 2026 by Donald R. Hodel unless noted otherwise.

Publication Date: 30 May 2026.

 

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

ISSN 269083245

Editor-In-Chief: Donald R. Hodel  drhodel@ucanr.edu

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

 

 

 

Table 1. Summary of some character differences among Chrysalidocarpus × lutecaryi (golden-triangle palm) and its two parents: C. decaryi and C. lutescens^z.

Character	C. decaryi		C. × lutecaryi	C. lutescens
Habit	solitary		sparingly clustered; ca. 3 stems	Clustered; 4–20 stems
Trunk (stem)
Diam. standard height      (cm)	30–40		26	5–12
Internode      length(cm)/color	3–10/gray with some white way		7.5/green with white-waxy indument distally, tan proximally	2–12/green to gray with white-waxy indument distally, yellowish or pale gray-brown proximally
Leaf
Leaves per stem	18–24		16–21	5–11
Leaf base length (cm)/      form	30–45, open		80/ open distally, tubular proximally	28–60/ tubular
Leaf base color/indu-      ment	abaxially white waxy with reddish pubescence		abaxially light green medially to greenish golden-yellow laterally and proximally/ overlain with conspicuous white-waxy indument and variably dense, ragged, scurfy tufts of reddish brown tomentum	abaxially yellowish with white-waxy indument, dense, scattered scales distally
Petiole length      (cm)/color/indument	30–50/grayish green/reddish pubescence		40–55/grayish green/ white-waxy, irregularly rounded scales with minute, reddish brown centers	19–37/yellow or yellowish orange/glabrous
Rachis length      (m)/color/indument	2.2–3/grayish green/densely pubescent		2.9/grayish green/ white-waxy, irregularly rounded scales with minute, reddish brown centers	1.1–1.9/yellow or yellow-orange/ glabrous
Quantity of pinnae per      each side of rachis	55–97		70	44–59
Pinnae disposition	ascending, pinnae on opposite sides forming a 90° angle		moderately ascending, pinnae on opposite sides forming a 90–120° angle	moderately ascending, pinnae on opposite sides forming a 90–120° angle
Pinnae abaxial indu-      ment	scattered, minute, reddish scales on fainter veins		green with very light, white-waxy indument and minute, granular, whitish spots; midrib and primary veins with minute, dark scales	gray from white-waxy indument, with scattered glands on minor veins
Inflorescence
Size (cm)	125–178 × 120		270 × 135	?
Position	interfoliar		interfoliar in flower and fruit	mostly interfoliar but sometimes infrafoliar in fruit
Orders of branching	3		3	3
Peduncle length (cm)	50–58		112	34–88
Peduncle indument	scattered scales		lightly scattered, minute, tan scales and reddish brown tomentum	glabrous
Prophyll length      (cm)/indument	25–63/scattered scales		?	31–102/scattered scales
Peduncular bract length      (cm)/indument		40–55/scattered scales	54/white-waxy overlain with moderately dense, reddish brown tomentum	48–60/scattered scales
Rachis length (cm)		118	140	20–110
Rachis indument		flaking, densely scaly	lightly scattered, minute, tan scales and reddish brown tomentum	glabrous
Rachillae length (cm)		12–26	32	6–30
Flowers
Staminate color		yellow to orange	yellow	yellow
Pistillate color		green	greenish yellow to yellow	yellow
Staminate petals (mm)		3.2–3.5 × 1.8–2.3	2.8-3.5 x 2.0-2.3	1.3–2.2 × 2–2.3
Pistillode (mm)		1.6 × 1	?	2.5–2.8 × 0.4–0.5
Fruit/Seed
Fruit size (mm)/shape		15–22 × 12–19 mm/ovoid to subglobose	(immature) 7 × 4 mm, oblong-obovoid	12–18 × 7–10 mm/ ellipsoid to obovoid
Seed size (mm)/shape		17–19 × 16–18 mm/subglobose to ellipsoid	14-16 x 7-9	11–16 × 6–9.5 mm/ovoid with obtuse apex and pointed base
Endosperm		ruminate	?	homogeneous
Eophyll		bifid	bifid	bifid

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

______________________________________________________________________________

Table 2. Comparison of some character of Chrysalidocarpus × pembacaryi and C. × lutecaryi.

Character	C. × pembacaryi	C. × lutecaryi
Habit	clustered	clustered
Trunk
Diam. standard height      (cm)	30	26
Internode      length(cm)/color	7/green distally with some light white wax, tan proximally	7.5/green with white-waxy indument distally, tan proximally
Leaf
Leaves per stem	14–18	16–21
Leaf base length (cm),      form	70, open	80, open
Leaf base abaxial      color/indument	green distally and yellow-cream proximally/white-waxy indument overlain with dense, reddish brown tomentum	light green medially to greenish golden-yellow laterally and proximally/ conspicuous white-waxy indument overlain with variably dense, ragged, scurfy tufts of reddish brown tomentum
Petiole length (cm)/      color/indument	35/green/ white-waxy, laterally with dense, reddish brown tomentum	40–55/grayish green/ white-waxy, irregularly rounded white-waxy scales with minute, reddish brown centers
Rachis length      (m)/color/indument	3.6/ green/ reddish brown tomentum	2.9/grayish green/ white-waxy, irregularly rounded scales with minute, reddish brown centers
Quantity of pinnae per      each side of rachis	87	70
Pinnae disposition	steeply ascending, pinnae on opposite sides forming a 60° angle	moderately ascending, pinnae on opposite sides forming a 90–120° angle
Pinnae abaxial indument	dense, small, white-waxy scales; veins  with minute, brown scales	very light, white-waxy indument and minute, granular, whitish spots; midrib and primary veins with minute, dark scales
Inflorescence
Size (cm)	260 × 180	270 × 135
Position	interfoliar in flower, infrafoliar in fruit	interfoliar in flower and fruit
Orders of branching	4	3
Peduncle length (cm)	95	112
Peduncle indument	dense reddish brown tomentum	lightly scattered, minute, tan scales and reddish brown tomentum
Peduncular bract length      (cm)/indument	55/white waxy overlain with dense, reddish brown tomentum	54/white-waxy overlain with moderately dense, reddish brown tomentum
Rachis length (cm)	175	140
Rachis indument	reddish brown tomentum	lightly scattered, minute, tan scales and reddish brown tomentum
Rachillae length (cm)	29	32