User Tag List

Informational! Informational!:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 8 of 16

Thread: Discussions of Sarracenia Taxonomy/Nomenclature

  1. #1
    Moderator Joseph Clemens's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Tucson, Arizona
    Posts
    2,539
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Discussions of Sarracenia Taxonomy/Nomenclature

    There is an S. purpurea var. montana, but not an S. purpurea subsp. venosa var. montana -- and what is OP, the other parent, of the mentioned hybrid?

    [On the above, I was mistaken - see additional discussion, below]
    Last edited by Joseph Clemens; 01-30-2015 at 02:00 PM. Reason: Nomenclature - correction
    Joseph Clemens
    Tucson, Arizona, U S A

  2. #2
    BaseDrifter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Bay Area, CA - Zone 10B
    Posts
    102
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The seeds were given to me and labeled as S. purpurea subsp. venosa var. montana x OP (open pollinated.)

    The note that was included read as follows.

    I am also including some montana x OP seeds. I have germinated this batch before and they all look like purpurea montana x purpurea venosa, but they came to me labeled as open pollinated, so I will keep it so.
    What would be the proper way to classify them?

    Edit: Since you seem to be more well versed in the naming conventions than I am, what is the reason for S. x readii or S. x readei not being a valid name? I thought it was described by Bell as discussed here.

    Though I also found this which lists its taxonomic standing as not accepted.

    When I purchased the plant it was listed as S. x readii, so that is what I've always called it.
    Last edited by BaseDrifter; 01-29-2015 at 10:19 PM.

  3. #3
    Goodkoalie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Sacramento, California
    Posts
    160
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by BaseDrifter View Post
    The seeds were given to me and labeled as S. purpurea subsp. venosa var. montana x OP (open pollinated.)

    The note that was included read as follows.



    What would be the proper way to classify them?
    For the sake of keeping things short, i would call them S. p. subsp. v. var. montana OP on a label, but you can call them whatever you want, as long as you make sure to include OP and that it is montana. There are no other sarracenias with the var. montana, so it would be safe to call them even var. montana x op, as long as you know what it means.

    The proper way to classify them is:
    S. purpurea subsp. venosa var. monata [not really, since there is no such published plant, "montana" is a variety only known from the northern form of this species - see CP Database][On the above, I was mistaken - see additional discussion, below]OP
    Last edited by Joseph Clemens; 01-30-2015 at 02:03 PM. Reason: Nomenclature

  4. #4
    Moderator Joseph Clemens's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Tucson, Arizona
    Posts
    2,539
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    For some reason, the IPNI recently changed the spelling to S. x readei - see IPNI. But the CP Database, still has it, despite its new spelling, as an unaccepted name, valid names are listed there, in all bold. It is, however, valid to call it - Sarracenia rubra x leucophylla or Sarracenia leucophylla x rubra. The hybrid formula are much easier to understand. Many people, and even many nurseries, are continuing to use invalid or inaccurate names - it is a real trouble , for some of us. I quit counting, how many times I received plant material, that I eventually discovered, was actually misidentified, it was actually something other than what it was sold/gifted/traded to me as. Not always the direct fault of the person I got the plant(s) from. What bothers me most, is when I'm fooled, and unintentionally continue to distribute plants I accept as correctly identified, then belatedly discover they are not.

    If you can, I'd check with the originator. Since there is no valid published species by that name. There is no Sarracenia purpurea subsp. venose var. montana. Perhaps it is simply a misnamed S. purpurea var. montana. Maybe they are the hybrid (S. purpurea var. montana x S. purpurea subsp. venosa) - since a simple hybrid, can be written with or without the parentheses.

    Thanks for clarifying the definition of OP. It is not an abbreviation that I've seen used before with CP, but it makes perfect sense.


    When I'm writing plant names on an international, public forum, I try to remember that many viewers of these posts may have no idea about valid, accurate, names, they may be inspired to try to locate and grow plants we write about here, but if the names are not correct, they may be disappointed when they try to locate what they see and read about in our posts. However, if we all use the same names to describe the same plants. everyone's experience, expert and beginner alike will have a better chance to be the best experience, possible.


    BTW, BaseDrifter, I really enjoy your photo's.
    Last edited by Joseph Clemens; 01-29-2015 at 11:17 PM.
    Joseph Clemens
    Tucson, Arizona, U S A

  5. #5
    BaseDrifter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Bay Area, CA - Zone 10B
    Posts
    102
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Joseph Clemens View Post
    If you can, I'd check with the originator. Since there is no valid published species by that name. There is no Sarracenia purpurea subsp. venose var. montana. Perhaps it is simply a misnamed S. purpurea var. montana. Maybe they are the hybrid (S. purpurea var. montana x S. purpurea subsp. venosa) - since a simple hybrid, can be written with or without the parentheses.

    Thanks for clarifying the definition of OP. It is not an abbreviation that I've seen used before with CP, but it makes perfect sense.
    I'll see if I can get clarification on the seeds, though I have a feeling they are just an open pollinated Sarracenia purpurea var. montana.

    Speaking of seeds, stratification for my Sarracenia seeds is over now, gotta pull em out of the fridge and get them under lights.

    When I'm writing plant names on an international, public forum, I try to remember that many viewers of these posts may have no idea about valid, accurate, names, they may be inspired to try to locate and grow plants we write about here, but if the names are not correct, they may be disappointed when they try to locate what they see and read about in our posts. However, if we all use the same names to describe the same plants. everyone's experience, expert and beginner alike will have a better chance to be the best experience, possible.
    That's a sentiment I can understand, it takes awhile to pick up what is proper and improper nomenclature though. I'm sure partly due to the fact that there is a lot of misinformation being spread (or just sloppiness/laziness with the conventions.)

    BTW, BaseDrifter, I really enjoy your photo's.
    Thanks Joseph!

    Quote Originally Posted by ps3isawesome View Post
    Oo I love your table, I think I'm going to copy both your water collecting system snd the set up of this table. Btw I couldn't stop looking at your plants and new acquired ones!!! Soooo pretty
    Thanks ps3, the table was just something I threw together today to give me a place to keep the plants out of harms way. That location is the sunniest spot in my back yard though, so I'll be building a more permanent water tray to house my Sarracenia at a minimum.

    I'm looking forward to the impending explosion of growth. Remember, this time last year, all I had was my S. x readei.
    Last edited by BaseDrifter; 01-29-2015 at 11:23 PM.

  6. #6
    Goodkoalie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Sacramento, California
    Posts
    160
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Joseph Clemens View Post
    If you can, I'd check with the originator. Since there is no valid published species by that name. There is no Sarracenia purpurea subsp. venose var. montana. Perhaps it is simply a misnamed S. purpurea var. montana. Maybe they are the hybrid (S. purpurea var. montana x S. purpurea subsp. venosa) - since a simple hybrid, can be written with or without the parentheses.

    Thanks for clarifying the definition of OP. It is not an abbreviation that I've seen used before with CP, but it makes perfect sense.


    When I'm writing plant names on an international, public forum, I try to remember that many viewers of these posts may have no idea about valid, accurate, names, they may be inspired to try to locate and grow plants we write about here, but if the names are not correct, they may be disappointed when they try to locate what they see and read about in our posts. However, if we all use the same names to describe the same plants. everyone's experience, expert and beginner alike will have a better chance to be the best experience, possible.


    BTW, BaseDrifter, I really enjoy your photo's.
    That is the first time i have seen var. montana as a variety of the northern subsp. Every book, i have read, every website, even in the ICPS newsletter I have seen it as S. purpurea subsp. venosa var. montana (Not correct nomenclature)

    Anyways, great pictures basedrifter. I love to see some pics from growers who are in my area, your plants look really nice and happy for you.

  7. #7
    Moderator Joseph Clemens's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Tucson, Arizona
    Posts
    2,539
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Well BaseDrifter and Goodkoalie,

    You have helped to uncover a nomenclatural discrepancy. I assume that the IPNI and CP Database, both use the initial publication by Schnell & Determann, in
    P: Castanea 62:60 (1997). I do not, presently have access to this publication, so I can't personally verify the information. However, I do have Donald Schnell's 2002 edition of Carnivorous Plants of the United States and Canada, where he does attribute the variety, "montana" to Sarracenia purpurea subspecies venosa, rather than the northern subspecies. If, however, the earlier Castanea publication, does attribute "montana" to the northern subspecies, that would take precedence - even if it were erroneous, at the time.

    On a slightly different tack, Sarracenia x readii, though then, or now, not being validly published, was corrected in syntax, since it was named after an L. H. Reade, and there was no valid reason to change the last letter of the Reade name in order to latinize it. It only needed the addition of the final "i". So the misspelling was correctable, especially since, in the interim, no other Sarracenia species or nothospecies was published with the name, S. readei, before the correction was made.

    Even invalid publications are important to the history of botanical nomenclature.
    Last edited by Joseph Clemens; 01-30-2015 at 12:51 AM.
    Joseph Clemens
    Tucson, Arizona, U S A

  8. #8
    Goodkoalie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Sacramento, California
    Posts
    160
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    This would make sense. Thanks for bring it to light to me . I will be changing it on my growlists asap.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •