Hoya carnosa ‘Cream One’
Hoya carnosa ‘Cream One’ is a historical cultivated selection whose species placement remains unresolved. Its growth habit is undocumented in the checked accounts; they report medium-sized leaves and, in a later compilation, cream flowers tinged lime green. The original naming publication and date are unverified, and the selection is associated with Genevieve McDonald’s Florida garden seedlings, whose pollen parents were unknown.
Historical Cream One descriptions, conflicting pubicalyx and carnosa placements, and qualified Lime Cream/Lime Green name relationships.
Overview
Hoya carnosa ‘Cream One’ is a historical cultivated name associated with Genevieve McDonald. Clark’s name list places it under Hoya pubicalyx, while Burton and a later cultivar compilation discuss it under Hoya carnosa. The records supply a leaf-size report and a later flower-colour description, but do not establish whether every use of the name refers to the same original selection. The original cultivar naming publication and date remain unverified. Lime Cream and Lime Green occur in later name discussions; those labels alone do not authenticate a plant as Cream One.
Related profiles: Sweet One
Photo Gallery
No identity-, rights-, and profile-reviewed photographs are available yet.
Evidence-Based Growing Insights
No form-specific care conclusion has passed review. The parent Hoya page remains the source for shared information; generic advice is not repeated here.
What We Know
- Clark’s historical name list places Cream One under Hoya pubicalyx and cites The Hoyan 11(2):45. The held Fraterna witness is a 1997 reprint credited to Asklepios 67 (1996). The original Asklepios article and the earlier Hoyan passage have not been verified here. These dates document a reference trail, rather than the date Cream One was first named as a cultivar.
- Burton’s 2005 account describes Cream One and Sweet One leaves as approximately 3½ × 2 inches, or roughly 9 × 5 cm. This is an approximate historical observation, not a measured range or an identification test. The two names are listed separately; similar leaf dimensions do not establish that they are the same selection.
- Burton’s 2006 Cream One entry credits Genevieve McDonald and discusses Lime Cream and Lime Green as disputed alternative names. A later Hatch compilation groups those labels with Cream One. These are attributed naming assertions. They do not establish that every plant sold or exchanged under any of these names is the same clone.
- Burton reports that McDonald grew seedlings from seed collected on plants in her Florida garden, without knowing whether they were selfed or crossed. Her 2010 account repeats the history of insect-pollinated pods and unknown pollen donors. Repeated accounts by the same author do not independently verify a particular cross or species ancestry.
- Green and Kloppenburg’s 2006 list places Cream One under Hoya carnosa in a mutant compilation drawn from catalogs and correspondence. The list heading does not prove that the selection arose as a mutation. Its classification and Burton’s seedling account remain historical assertions, without a verified genetic-origin conclusion.
- Hatch’s Genera H–I compilation describes Cream One flowers as cream with a lime-green tint and attributes its origin to McDonald. The document carries copyright years 2014 and 2015, which do not establish the cultivar’s naming date. The entry supplies no documented accession, so this is a later compiler’s description rather than a verified description of a traceable living plant.
- The earlier pubicalyx placement and later carnosa placements remain unresolved. A shared name cannot establish species parentage or prove continuity between the plants those authors knew. A documented propagation history and comparable leaf and flower records are needed to connect a living plant to the historical selection. The available evidence does not establish either present survival or loss.
What We Are Still Learning
When was Cream One first named as a cultivar?
What would help: The complete original Asklepios 67 article and the earlier The Hoyan 11(2):45 passage, with their imprints and any naming references they cite. A later reprint, copyright year, acquisition or trade date does not establish the naming date.
Do the pubicalyx and carnosa records concern the same original selection?
What would help: Contemporary labels, correspondence, accession and propagation records connecting the plants those authors discussed. Preserve conflicting placements and unknown parents until the records resolve them.
Which Lime Cream or Lime Green plants can be connected to Cream One?
What would help: The exact received name, dated acquisition and propagation history, and leaf and flower photographs of the same documented plant. Name equivalence in a compilation alone is insufficient.
Can an authenticated living plant and usable photographs be documented?
What would help: A traceable living propagation line, repeated measurements and observations with growing conditions, plus original photographs with creator credit and explicit display permission or a verifiable reuse license.
Common Misconceptions
- The 1996 article reference, 1997 reprint, later newsletter dates and Hatch copyright years do not establish the original cultivar naming date.
- Historical placement under carnosa or pubicalyx does not itself prove botanical ancestry.
- Lime Cream and Lime Green are not automatically authenticated synonyms for every modern plant bearing those labels.
- A mutant-list heading does not prove a mutation, and a garden-seed account does not establish a particular hybrid cross.
- Cream One and Sweet One remain separate names despite their shared leaf-size report.
- A plant’s absence from a bounded search does not establish extinction, and an online photograph does not itself grant reuse permission.