User Tag List

Informational! Informational!:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 9 to 16 of 23

Thread: Is hamata tentaculata?

  1. #9

    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Ft. Worth, TX
    Posts
    2,251
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    xvart I think you mean geotype, not genotype . If you mean genotype...remember that other things besides genotype influence the way a plant looks. Expressivity and penetrance are both influenced by the environment, and phenotype = genotype + (expressivity)*environment + penetrance*environment. Well the last two are more like functions of the environment, but I don't know how to make that fancy "F" lol.

    Could a naturally occurring, established hybrid eventually evolve into it's own species?
    I'd be willing to bet that a VERY considerable number of nep species have originated this way. Some people say copelandii is another alata, some don't, but its obvious that they have hybridized over the years. Stable stands of hybrids is mostly what creates species in the genus.

    Now, your example with what F1 offspring would look like what, regardless of the fact of if the numbers are right or not, is way off. I can not find any examples that lead me to believe that Nepenthes display simply autosomal dominance or recessivity. In primary hybrids, the progeny most often look like an intermediate mix of the mother and father, sometimes leaning a little more in one direction, probably do to amino acid derivative or steroidal hormones (possible terpines?) that alter gene expression. This can point only to the fact that Nepenthes display incomplete dominance or co-dominance.

    And, as it evolved as species over years it may have other changes that are slowly introduced by mother nature to better survive, further defining it from the parents.
    Do you realize how quick "over the years" is within the genus right now? We are currently witnessing speciation in maxima and alata, and possibly in the australasian Nepenthes (i.e. mirabilis/rowanae/tenax). Look at EPs greenhouse bred truncatas. They have gone from having a tinge of red to being almost solid deep red in 20 years. A few more generations, and its possible we will see some blacks. These might not be the same as the blacks the BE has though, which I think are a hybrid or variant. It has been mentioned by a few people that they have certain morphological differences defining them from normal truncata i.e. different "tooth" spacing and the fact that the leaf proceeds further down the tendril.

    Of course it is actually maxima breeding with maxima then I suppose the genetics would remain similar enough to the other forms.
    Debateable...these are really speciating before our eyes. I doubt 100 years from now they'll still all be "maxima". We'll see what happens in the near future with these, I just got some seeds today of the various Wamena forms. I also got some neoguineensis and insignis, but thats a different story.

    So which is the original?
    Its been hypothesized that hairy hamata and tentaculata are the originals, and the "hamata" we know (Sulawest form...looks almost identical to Sulawesi tentaculata) is really a stable hybrid. I buy it. Its entirely possible.

    Do extreme forms of plants evolve from bland ones? Or visa versa?
    "Extreme" forms come from "bland" ones. An extreme form has nothing to build on without something there first. Allow me to allude to dogs as an example. First they were wolves, then huskies (look like wolves) then blah blah blah dachshunds. I'd say a dachshund is a pretty extreme form compared to the starting material .


    I can't consider hamata and tentaculata totally different species and feel like I'm being rational. It's hairs branch out to 3 endings? So what...I might have longer fingers than someone else here but that doesn't make me a different species. I can think of 3 different forms of spectabilis that look at least as different as hamata and tentaculata, but they're all the same species. I think hamata being described as something knew rather than a varietal form is probably due to fanatacism of a new species. Plus, if it was "just" tentaculata, do you think the "people in power" could sell it for $60 and up? Me neither.

    Thank you bio degree for finally sort of paying off
    Z polski y dumny
    Prayer - how to do nothing and still think you're helping.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5F5aCUNE4Z8
    ^^^Newest vid

  2. #10
    Always a newbie glider14's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Louisville, Kentucky
    Posts
    3,956
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    N. tentaculata ssp dentata (N. hamata)
    N. villosa var elongata (N. edwardsiana)
    eh i can wonder in my mind

    i think the genus is in DESPERATE need of the "var" and "ssp" usages.

    Clint: what about N. hurrelliana? i think its a species as no hybrid of fusca x veitchii look like N. hurrelliana. it even breeds true from seed...
    Alex
    Everything is explainable. The seemingly unexplainable is but a result of our insufficient knowledge.- Hans Brewer

  3. #11

    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Ft. Worth, TX
    Posts
    2,251
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    i think its a species as no hybrid of fusca x veitchii look like N. hurrelliana
    Now they don't. Who knows what they looked like 1000 or more years ago? Compare any cross to an F2 of the same cross...you'll find it looks considerably different. So far I know of no F3s , but who knows what that would look like? I think thats why there are like 40 different kuchingensis, etc.

    Either way, hurrelliana = stable hybrid population. I think its safe to say its a species now, as eventually you will have to split a "species" off after many many generations of hybridization once it has become its own stable population, but hurrelliana's origins are without a doubt hybrid.
    Z polski y dumny
    Prayer - how to do nothing and still think you're helping.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5F5aCUNE4Z8
    ^^^Newest vid

  4. #12
    Doing it wrong until I do it right. xvart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Zone 8
    Posts
    5,594
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by phissionkorps View Post
    Now, your example with what F1 offspring would look like what, regardless of the fact of if the numbers are right or not, is way off. I can not find any examples that lead me to believe that Nepenthes display simply autosomal dominance or recessivity. In primary hybrids, the progeny most often look like an intermediate mix of the mother and father, sometimes leaning a little more in one direction, probably do to amino acid derivative or steroidal hormones (possible terpines?) that alter gene expression.
    Sure, I agree. Then that would just go to a quicker transition and establishment of a "different" species since the offspring do resemble an intermediate mix yet still possess enough of the parents to recognize them. Hybrid mixes [(A x B) x (A x B)] would then express the intermediate look of the intermediates, thus eventually muttling the unique traits of the parents. I guess I was just trying to (poorly) use genetics (is it mendel diagram?) as a reference point.

    Quote Originally Posted by phissionkorps View Post
    Do you realize how quick "over the years" is within the genus right now?
    Of course. As mentioned in one of the other threads and how easy it is to wash out traits it can (and does) happen quickly. I wouldn't dispute that.

    Quote Originally Posted by phissionkorps View Post
    Look at EPs greenhouse bred truncatas. They have gone from having a tinge of red to being almost solid deep red in 20 years. A few more generations, and its possible we will see some blacks. These might not be the same as the blacks the BE has though, which I think are a hybrid or variant. It has been mentioned by a few people that they have certain morphological differences defining them from normal truncata i.e. different "tooth" spacing and the fact that the leaf proceeds further down the tendril.
    Doesn't it matter that this is done in cultivation though? I would assume that nurseries selectively breed certain plants in attempts to enhance the color. In the wild, while still possible, would take longer than 20 years.

    Quote Originally Posted by phissionkorps View Post
    I think hamata being described as something knew rather than a varietal form is probably due to fanatacism of a new species.
    I totally agree with the fanaticism part. I mean seriously, look at those teeth! lol.

    Quote Originally Posted by phissionkorps View Post
    Plus, if it was "just" tentaculata, do you think the "people in power" could sell it for $60 and up? Me neither.
    I'm sure you could still charge $60 and up for a N. tentaculata var. "hairy and toothy."

    Phission, as I mentioned the other night about learning German, you now want me to retake some biology/genetics courses!

    xvart.
    "The tragedy of life is not that every man loses; but that he almost wins."

    "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"

  5. #13
    Always a newbie glider14's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Louisville, Kentucky
    Posts
    3,956
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Either way, hurrelliana = stable hybrid population. I think its safe to say its a species now, as eventually you will have to split a "species" off after many many generations of hybridization once it has become its own stable population, but hurrelliana's origins are without a doubt hybrid.
    so if other natural hybrids like x hookeriana remain stable...they are a new species? same with another genus like Sarracenia many of the hybrids thought to be species...if they constantly bred with the same hybrid over time. would they also be a new species. like if you bred S. x wriglyana(sp?) with another clone of wriglyana and so on and so forth.

    Alex
    Everything is explainable. The seemingly unexplainable is but a result of our insufficient knowledge.- Hans Brewer

  6. #14

    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Ft. Worth, TX
    Posts
    2,251
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I guess I was just trying to (poorly) use genetics (is it mendel diagram?) as a reference point.
    Punnet square

    I agree about your statement regarding EP's selection. Its definitely not natural, but its certainly working: well and quickly. In the wild it would definitely take a lot longer, but at least we know its possible (via the blacks).

    Like I said, better take advantage of that tuition deal you were talking about. Genetics is a hard, hard freaking class though, as is cell bio. My fav class ever was Evolution and Classification of Plants. I have like 2 classes left...but 1 is about bugs and ones about mammals haha
    Z polski y dumny
    Prayer - how to do nothing and still think you're helping.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5F5aCUNE4Z8
    ^^^Newest vid

  7. #15

    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Ft. Worth, TX
    Posts
    2,251
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    so if other natural hybrids like x hookeriana remain stable...they are a new species? same with another genus like Sarracenia many of the hybrids thought to be species...if they constantly bred with the same hybrid over time. would they also be a new species. like if you bred S. x wriglyana(sp?) with another clone of wriglyana and so on and so forth.

    Alex
    More or less...eventually.
    When the time comes, you should pursue a bio degree
    Z polski y dumny
    Prayer - how to do nothing and still think you're helping.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5F5aCUNE4Z8
    ^^^Newest vid

  8. #16
    Doing it wrong until I do it right. xvart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Zone 8
    Posts
    5,594
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by phissionkorps View Post
    Punnet square
    Yes! Now you can really tell how long it's been since I've had any semblance of genetics. Wasn't Wendel a famous geneticist?

    Quote Originally Posted by phissionkorps View Post
    I agree about your statement regarding EP's selection. Its definitely not natural, but its certainly working: well and quickly. In the wild it would definitely take a lot longer, but at least we know its possible (via the blacks).
    Yes. The breeding programs do speed things up a lot, and stablize the hybrids very quickly. With a little bit of time and resources we could probably create a species just by growing some hybrids, then breeding those hybrids, then breeding those hybrids, etc. etc. And along they way I bet we would come across some truly unique plants that we might be able to selectively breed our stock to try and produce more that looked similar to it.

    Quote Originally Posted by phissionkorps View Post
    Its been hypothesized that hairy hamata and tentaculata are the originals, and the "hamata" we know (Sulawest form...looks almost identical to Sulawesi tentaculata) is really a stable hybrid. I buy it. Its entirely possible.
    I'm not sure I understand this; both hairy hamata and tentaculata are the originals? How can there be two originals? Wasn't the question whether one was a variation of the other? Or are they both variations of some other species?

    It makes me laugh that if the hairy, toothy hamata was the original and the non hairy, non toothy tentaculata was a variation of that plant (plausible) I doubt that that variation would be sought after in such fanaticism as the hamata. I mean, in that case, the variation is a less "exciting" version of the original, when often times the variations are more highly sought after.

    xvart.
    "The tragedy of life is not that every man loses; but that he almost wins."

    "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 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
  •