Socratea exorrhiza
species of plant
Socratea exorrhiza, the walking palm or cashapona, is a palm native to rainforests in tropical Central and South America. It can grow to 25 metres in height, with a stem diameter of up to 16 cm, but is more typically 15–20 m tall and 12 cm in diameter. It has unusual stilt roots, the function of which has been debated. Many species of epiphyte have been found growing on the palms. The palm is pollinated by beetles, and various organisms eat its seeds or seedlings.
Function of stilt roots
E. J. H. Corner in 1961 hypothesised that the unusual stilt roots of S. exorrhiza were an adaptation to allow the palm to grow in swampy areas of forest. No evidence exists that stilt roots are in fact an adaptation to flooding, and alternative functions for them have been suggested. John H. Bodley suggested in 1980 that they in fact allow the palm to "walk" away from the point of germination if another tree falls on the seedling and knocks it over. If such an event occurs then the palm produces new vertical stilt roots and can then right itself, the original roots rotting away. Radford writes in the Skeptical Inquirer in December 2009 that "As interesting as it would be to think that when no one is around, trees walk the rainforest floor, it is a mere myth", and cites two detailed studies that came to this conclusion.
“Socratea exorrhiza” enters the record as species of plant. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Socratea, exorrhiza and species can confirm, complicate or overturn.
Why this record matters
“Socratea exorrhiza” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Socratea, exorrhiza and species provides the most credible route into that argument.
Datasets, specimens, observations and peer-reviewed methods provide the appropriate test for the technical claims summarized here. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jun 2, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q140538. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1961, 1980 and 2009.
Scientific names, classifications and consensus can change while older terminology persists in catalogues and historical literature. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Check terminology, classification and the date of the cited evidence. Scientific names and technical consensus can change while older records retain historical value.
- Current terminology
- Classification context
- Finding cited technical literature
Primary datasets, specimen catalogues, standards bodies and the most recent peer-reviewed literature.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Socratea exorrhiza”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Socratea exorrhiza primary sources, Socratea exorrhiza archive and Socratea research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Socratea exorrhiza”?
- Has classification or technical consensus changed since the cited source?
- Which observation, specimen, dataset or publication supports the account?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Socratea exorrhiza” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.