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!

Who else grows the real clipeata?

Should be "real" since no one knows for "sure".

I have 2 clone 1's. The poser clipeata :)

I don't know why US nurseries never have any of the good stuff like this :(
 
I beg to differ. Only the genders of the clones are not known. Clones 2, 3, U, and T are all the real thing. The only "fake" one is clone 1. If you look on Wistuba's site, clone 1 is not listed as clipeata because it isn't, and clone T is not listed because it died, and there may be only 1 more clone T alive, which is owned by someone other than Wistuba.
 
It's not believed by most to be pure, and I personally it to be a hybrid as well, but it's not confirmed as of yet. Unless it changed on me since the last debate on this plant. Oh wait the last debate went in circles LOL! Wistuba says N. adnata is a highlander, too so it's not infallible. It hasn't been proven if it's a hybrid or not. I don't see eymae in it. I can't explain it, so I go along with what most people say.



Three things you don't discuss at dinner, religion, politics, and the authenticity of N. clipeata clones lmao!
 
I definitely see eymae in the pitchers, and there is certainly hybrid characteristics in the leaves. As far as I know, they never attain the rounded appearance for which clipeata is named.

Maybe an expert can jump in and shed some light on this?
 
Im with JLAP. If its not proven that its a hybrid then you shouldnt just assume that it is.
Though I have spoken to Andreas Wistuba about it and he also "thinks" its a hybrid.

But it can surely be clipetea. With different characaristics.
I mean, have you ever seen 2 plants in the wild that look exactly the same?`
Or in cultivation for that matter.
 
Sorry but I don’t have a real clone. I got a N. clipeata X (clipeata X eymae) I got it because-
1. It looks just like the full species except minor differences
2. It is a easier to grow form that grows faster
3. its far cheaper and more available in the US
4. it hasn’t been proven as a hybrid
I just ordered it and am waiting for it to arrive; I can’t wait to see how it’s going to look!
I do plan on getting a true clipeata when I can find one readily (cheaply) available.
By the way does anyone have photos of the real clipeata or of the clipeata X (clipeata X eymae)?
 
DCP_1636.jpg

The leaves for which the species is named

DSCN0739.jpg

unopened pitcher on immature (secondary) leaf

courtesy of the photo finder:
clip x eymae
cxe_poster.jpg


clip x clip x eymae
http://www.exoticplantsplus.com/NclipeataClip1Q.htm


The differences between the true clipeata and clip x clip x eymae and especially clip x eymae are more apparent than the similarities. If these would flower, it would be easy to prove clone 1 as a hybrid or not. Based on morphology though (I do realize thats not the best idea, but it seems to be how nepenthes are classified), it is painfully obvious the hybrids are considerably different from the true species.
 
Hey! That's my poster! :nono:
 
  • #11
somthing i was reading a little while ago. it makes sense to me. with clip x (clip x eyame) how on earth could someone decide this? you would have to have a mature clip and a mature clip x eyame. and if no one knew that one clip was a clip x eyame until recently....how did they decide? did they have to retrace to the parents? what made them decide from there?
Alex
 
  • #12
Hi phissionkorps,

With clone 1 - I assume you mean the one that has been circulated in the US, which is clearly a hybrid? I have seen a photo of Wistubas clone 1 which looks like the real thing.

Several years ago I got clone 1 or 3 (according to the invoice) from Wistuba. I did notice that later on that the clone 1 was removed from his price list, or does it have a new name - clone U? I don't remember seeing clone U in the older sales list, but I could be wrong.

Regards,

Christer
 
  • #13
Are there multiple clone 1's? The only one i know of is the one Wistuba used to sell. The way it was decided that it was a hybrid was the fact that there was an accident/indicent at Munich Botanical Gardens in which clip x eymae was crossed with clipeata. These seeds are the ones Wistuba grew and sold as clone 1. Clone U is a different clone alltogether. If you look at the photos I posted, the first 2 are of clone U, obviously the real clipeata. The link in that same post (going to Paroubek's site) has pictures of clone 1, which is clearly a hybrid. Clone U has been on the sales list for a long time, and as of yesterday, was still there.
 
  • #15
Thanks for the link Donn.

I read through all 3 pages, and according to Paroubek, Klein, Wistuba, and 1 or 2 others, it appears that I am right. Clone 1 is indeed a hybrid.
 
  • #17
the picture of lcone 1 posted by "neps" does indeed look like the real thing, but every other photo I've ever seen of clone 1 does not. If you read the link Donn posted, on the 3rd page, it is pretty much demonstrated that clone 1 is indeed a hybrid.

Besides the photo posted by neps, if you look at photos of clone 1, it clearly does not match with a true species.
 
  • #18
Hi,

I don't disagree that the pics Sunbelle posted are of hybrids, that it is quite obvious. What I'm trying to understand is where it says that this clip-1 by JDK, is the same as Wistubas clone 1. I did read that Wistuba had lost (discontinued?) a clone 6 which is clearly a hybrid, but that is all. On the other hand I realize that Wistuba did remove his clone 1 as well. For what reason i don't know, since "neps" plant looks correctly identified. Here's some old pics of my clone 1 or 3. I feel everything fits the true species with leaf and basic pitcher shape considered, but the shape of the lid doesn't look alright. Although the lid looks okay on two of the pics it has a tendency to be flatter like the first (and oldest) photo shows. The angle between the lid and "mouth" is bigger, making it more open.

clipeataa.jpg
clipeatab.jpg
clipeatac.jpg


Regards,

Christer
 
  • #19
Here are a couple shots of one of mine. I believe that this is Wistuba's clone 2.
I posted these elsewhere a while ago, but given this thread, decided to add them
here. I grow this as a highland species, and it seem to exhibit better coloration
under highland conditions than under a lowland regime.

Nclipeata1.jpg


Nclipeata2.jpg
 
  • #20
christerb,

The pitcher(s) you have shot photos of do not seem to be bulbous enough at the bottom, and the upper half of the pitcher does not seem "funnel" shaped enough. Also, as you have stated, the lid seems to be at too great an angle to the mouth in comparison to the true species. One of the defining characteristics is that the lid is held very tightly to the mouth, as the species experiences extreme wind in the wild. The lid also seems in the first two pictures to not be "flat" enough. If the clone you are posting pics of is clone 1, this is expected, as all of these are not clip characteristics, but if it is clone 3, there is something ot be explained.

The pictures neps has posted are of clone 2, which not surprizingly, fit the textbook "type" of the true clipeata.

From what I understand (though I could of course be wrong), is that the JDK clone is the same as Wistuba's clone 1. If this is the case, they are both clearly hybrids. I had always heard of "clone 1" and "JDK clone" being used synonymously. The "clipeata" being circulated as the "JDK clone" is certianly a hybrid, as is "clip clone 1" sold by Wistuba. It is my understanding that they are one and the same.
 
Back
Top