What's new
TerraForums Venus Flytrap, Nepenthes, Drosera and more talk

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Unknown drosera

Any ideas ?
Thanks
Dennis
d1.jpg
 
It reminds me of D. burmannii, but I am not certain.
 
That's what popped into my mind when I saw it. D. burmanii
 
Unless it's D. sessifolia... but D. burmannii is far more accessible.
 
D. burmannii for sure. It is an annual so collect seed from it when it flowers.
 
Gold stars to Jim Scott and Dewy for the correct spelling of this species!
 
Definatly D. burmannii. Sessifolia looks different
 
  • #10
Hello William,

I think, the correct spelling of this plant is Drosera burmanni - with only one i. This goes back to a grammar mistake in Vahls descriptions.

Christian
 
  • #11
your in the springs? I think I met you at the flower show, you're the one with all the helis and south african sundews right?
 
  • #12
Hi Christian

I hadn't heard that before. I always thought that once something was published, mistake or not, it stood as it was described and published.

Interesting...I always heard 'burmannii' was correct. I guess I need to do some erasing...
 
  • #13
Now I am TOTALLY cornfused! (sic) I even had an online conversation about how to pronounce those two 'i's.
smile_k_ani_32.gif
 
  • #14
pronouncing the two i's is you pronounce the first as e and the second as i on its own
smile.gif
 
  • #15
Hi,

On our German Board we were told, that Vahl originally published this species as Drosera burmanni. So, this is the correct name for it.

Christian
 
  • #16
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Tamlin Dawnstar @ April 27 2005,10:50)]Gold stars to Jim Scott and Dewy for the correct spelling of this species!
Thanks. Tamlin. I'm trying..... very trying!
smile_n_32.gif
 
  • #17
Drosera burmannii is the spelling registered with the ICPS.

N: +[Drosera burmannii {Vahl}]
P: Symbol.3:50 (1794)
T: LK, Burmann s.n. (?C)
CLA: CAR-NEP-DRO-DRO-THE-THE
L: IN, LK, MM, TH, CN, JP, TW, MY, ID (Borneo, Celebes, N.Guin., Java), PG, PW, N & E AU

LFR:

18:
Japan-Korea
.
.
.
136:
Eremaea

XN: 20 {Narasimhachar}
XNP: Proc.Ind.Acad.Sci.Sect.B 29:98 (1949)

ICPS - Drosera burmannii
 
  • #18
So now it just comes down to who you want to trust...the publisher of the species, or the ICPS? Hmmm, hard choice.

So one mistake one one little paper is causing the fire to fly right now...oh the irony!
smile_n_32.gif


Christian, I want to know, if Vahl had published the species, where did he publish it in, and why in the world it get to the ICPS as having two 'i's??

Maybe someone should notify the ICPS.

Jimscott: You are stranger than I thought.
laugh.gif
 
  • #19
Hi,

We had a similar discussion on our german board lately. Andreas Fleischmann told us, that Vahl published it as Drosera burmanni. This is grammatically not correct (it should be Drosera burmannii if it was correct latin), but this is as it is published and so this name is valid.

The Database is run by Jan Schlauer and shows his view. He can make mistakes as everyone else can do.

Christian
 
  • #20
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Jason Wong @ May 15 2005,5:28)]Jimscott: You are stranger than I thought.
laugh.gif
Thank you Jason! I'll take it as a compliment.

With regard to the sundew in question, can't we just accept both spellings, since the published version is technically incorrect - yet published? I'm all for correct nomenclature, grammar, and spelling, but it isn't unheard of to have variant, acceptable spellings of the same word. e.g. gage and gauge.
 
Back
Top