Last edited by Cthulhu138; 08-11-2013 at 09:46 AM.
If I remember correctly, x splendiana is (smilesii x maxima), not a mirabilis cross. I've made this hybrid a few times already, but I've got plenty of N. ventricosa "red" pollen if that's any interest.
I fear I must argue then. Neither mirabilis nor kampotiana/smilesii would contribute the wide peristome or prominent mottling that this hybrid has, as from all pics I've seen, none of those parents has such characters. And this is the first time I have seen this plant referred to as being such a cross, every other thread I've seen where parentage has been discussed has seemed to agree maxima is at least one parent.
This is the first time I've ever heard anyone claim that the male parent of x splendiana is maxima and not mirabilis. Could you please site the literature that states this ? If this is indeed the case, I'd like to confirm this for my records.
That said, I have no trouble believing that N. smilesii X N. mirabilis could result in N. Splendid Diana. While not every example of the two species shows distinct pitcher body mottling, many do, and there is also the fact that in hybridizing, any two species crossed can produce startling results, revealing traits that are not seen in either species. There are many hybrids in commerce that illustrate this point. Its important to remember that crossing N. "black" with N. "white" does not always produce N. "gray", but unique and novel characteristics can - and often do - result. Relying on phenotypical traits alone as a measure of a plant's capabilities as a breeder is a weak premise.
It seems Sunbelle knows a pretty good record of the history of the grex, produced by Bednar using what was called N. "kampotiana" and crossing it with pollen from maxima to create x splendiana.
However, this seems to be derailing the thread's original purpose (I do apologize), so we can decide for ourselves what the parentage was using the sources we have. My offer of ventricosa pollen still stands, but I'm sure someone out there has something more interesting to offer.
I wonder why the parentage cited on CPphotofinder still lists it as kampotiana X mirabilis, if it is, in fact kampotiana X maxima. I've come to believe that Bob's information is carefully researched and accurate.
Haha, now I'm totally confused. This is one of the many reasons that hybrids frustrate me. Looks like I'm going to have to send out some emails.
Anyway, thanks to all who have pledged to contribute pollen to this plant........whatever it may really be.