|
|
Post by paulbarden on May 24, 2012 21:40:48 GMT 7
*bump*
Any opinions about this? Do you think this is starting to resemble talangensis more as the pitchers get larger?
|
|
|
|
Post by mato77429 on May 25, 2012 23:36:51 GMT 7
I spoke to someone who bought one of these plants, and he said the source named a few potential species that may have contributed to the hybrid - talangensis not being one of them. Pectinata (may need to double check that) seemed to be what he thought it was, but even that is just conjecture since he did not cross the plant himself.
|
|
|
|
Post by paulbarden on May 25, 2012 23:57:22 GMT 7
I spoke to someone who bought one of these plants, and he said the source named a few potential species that may have contributed to the hybrid - talangensis not being one of them. Pectinata (may need to double check that) seemed to be what he thought it was, but even that is just conjecture since he did not cross the plant himself. And yet Dean (from whom I bought mine: he grew them from seed) told me he asked the person who supplied him with the seed and the supplier told Dean that talangensis WAS nearby and a likely candidate for cross-pollination. Time will tell, no doubt! |
|
lance
Full Member
Posts: 164
|
Post by lance on May 26, 2012 6:39:51 GMT 7
I also messaged him and he told me the plants that were around... still, its entirely possible that a male talang flowered, died, decayed, then three months later the seed pods were found.
|
|
|
|
Post by paulbarden on Mar 8, 2013 1:21:16 GMT 7
Here is an update on my "N. Pyriformis", or whatever it is. Pyriformis appears to be as good a suggestion as any. Whatever it is, it's beautiful.  |
|
Api
Junior Member
Posts: 60
|
Post by Api on Mar 9, 2013 22:30:37 GMT 7
Totally pyriformis. Thats a great pic Paul!
|
|
|
|
Post by JB_orchidguy on Mar 30, 2013 1:46:44 GMT 7
Paul. I just finished reading this entire thread and read the one where the naming of grex and all that and how you come to realize it wasn't the same as it is with orchids. I was an orchid person first too and when u had a discussion about sarr. 'Hurricane creek white' and realized you can get seeds for it. I was like what? Its a cultivar. It should be asexually reproduced from a cutting. Well that didn't hold true in the sarr world. So I learned along ago its different over here with cp than it is with orchids.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Evans on Mar 30, 2013 5:51:19 GMT 7
Dear JBO,
Actually, even with orchids you can grow cultivars from seed. It is just that no one breeds their orchids for the kind of stability needed to maintain the special characteristics through many generations. In tomatoes, cultivars having this quality are called "heirloom" varieties.
Pretty much absent from orchids, but not "impossible" or specifically disallowed. I think the main issue is the difficultly in germinating the seed in normal conditions... So people multiply orchids via TC and Keiki paste.
|
|
|
|
Post by agustinfranco on Mar 31, 2013 16:36:19 GMT 7
Well, in one regard, every unique life form that forms (collectively) a breeding unit is a member of a particular species. Latin Binomials are species names, they are ranked as species, but hybrids are members of hybrid species based on their genetic composition and ecology. They only become a "true species" when at least one of their parent species becomes extinct. I.e. they must show better fitness and achieve some degree of evolutionary success. In that time, the hybrids go from being rare misfits that barely ever reproduce to something thing with established populations that successfully breeds amongst itself at a self sustaining rate. They no longer can or need to be produced from combining the parent species. The genes need time and a large enough sample of individuals to make the changes (most often simple rearrangements are all that's required) needed to achieve these kinds of successes. A lot of species we have today would have received a "x" in their names had we come along and named them earlier in their history. Hi Dave: I have a question regarding the above statement. If a so called "natural hybrid" becomes a species when either parent plant population ceases to exist in the vicinity, then could this apply to the platychila debate? Some plants may have fusca traits, but there is no fusca in the vicinity or the fuscas in the near vicinity look relatively different from the hypothetical fusca genes in the platychila population? Gus |
|
|
|
Post by Dave Evans on Apr 5, 2013 3:57:33 GMT 7
Well, in one regard, every unique life form that forms (collectively) a breeding unit is a member of a particular species. Latin Binomials are species names, they are ranked as species, but hybrids are members of hybrid species based on their genetic composition and ecology. They only become a "true species" when at least one of their parent species becomes extinct. I.e. they must show better fitness and achieve some degree of evolutionary success. In that time, the hybrids go from being rare misfits that barely ever reproduce to something thing with established populations that successfully breeds amongst itself at a self sustaining rate. They no longer can or need to be produced from combining the parent species. The genes need time and a large enough sample of individuals to make the changes (most often simple rearrangements are all that's required) needed to achieve these kinds of successes. A lot of species we have today would have received a "x" in their names had we come along and named them earlier in their history. Hi Dave: I have a question regarding the above statement. If a so called "natural hybrid" becomes a species when either parent plant population ceases to exist in the vicinity, then could this apply to the platychila debate? Some plants may have fusca traits, but there is no fusca in the vicinity or the fuscas in the near vicinity look relatively different from the hypothetical fusca genes in the platychila population? Gus I don't see how... It just seems like there are some hybrids present at the type location. N. fusca can be hiding since it can occur high up in trees and without a lot of time spent looking, there can be N. fusca here and there completely un-noticed. The same applies to N. affinis fusca and N. epiphytica. I recall someone has found a single N. fusca at a really high altitude and discounted it being a N. fusca since it was "too far from any other fusca." Actually, probably not.  It can be extremely difficult to be certain smaller epiphytes are not present. |
|
|
|
Post by agustinfranco on Apr 5, 2013 4:35:06 GMT 7
Hi Dave, thanks for your reply. The issue is to
Find the elusive fusca to prove that the fusca genes came
From a plant without any platychila traits.
Otherwise, introgression may be a more plausible
Explanation.
|
|
