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!

Not the N. mac "Daddy"

Hiya Fellow CP'ers

Recently I purchased what I thought was a N. macrophylla, but looking at its newest pitcher, it is obviously not.

I have contacted the person who sold me this plant, but he has not yet responded. I believe he had sold me this plant on good faith, but it unfortunately is one of those neps that needed some growing out to truly verify its species.

Accoriding to this person, he got it from Andreas Wistuba about 3-4 years ago as a N. macrophylla, but it had no clone ID, the diameter of the plant is about the plant is about 5-6" and the pitcher in the pic is 2" tall including lid.

I've already contacted a couple of other members here for their opinions, but just wanted to know what the rest of you folks thought.

Here are some pics:

dsc01438sb.jpg


dsc01437kr.jpg


dsc01443s.jpg


dsc01444j.jpg



Any guesses, info, suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks to all those who respond :hail:

Good Growing,
E

ps. I've already posted this topic on the "Help ID" section here, but I thought I'd get more responses here.

Mods, if you feel this topic is inapproriate here, then please delete and my apologies :-(
 
Looks like it could possibly be a N. x trusmadiensis.
 
like i said on the other forum. its most likely the clone from wistuba that ended up being trusmadienses.

Alex

PS being that seeds probably originated from wild sources. it would be mac mama ;)
 
Nice plant! I agree with glider, I think trusmadienses is the most likely. Its still small but when compared to this picture, I think its a good match.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b266/RainforestGuy/bddc9352.jpg (from cp photo finder)

Hiya Ant-

Here is a pic of JensB old TM: http://pics.nepenthes.se/forumpics/07.08/img_8826.jpg

Which kinda sold me on what my mystery plant was.

But still I would like to gather a consensus.

Thanks for the pic.

Good Growing To Ya :boogie:
E
 
I agree that it most likely a hybrid; though considering where it came from, it was most probably an honest mistake. The pitcher is a bit off for N. macrophylla but it is still quite young; and there have been more than a few seed-grown plants "macros" that I have grown which exhibited a fair range of variability in early leaf shape and in juvenile pitchers.

Since I am currently awaiting a N. x trusmadiensis, I can only hope that it is as attractive as that plant . . .
 
"Since I am currently awaiting a N. x trusmadiensis, I can only hope that it is as attractive as that plant . . . "

Thanks for them kind words there BigBella.

E
 
Hehe - your plant might not be the "Mac Daddy," but N. macrophylla might be its daddy.
~Joe
 
  • #10
I dunno but I like the plant!
 
  • #11
I have seen dozens of N. macrophylla seedlings over the years from both seed and tc and I don't recall a single one ever having striped peristome. So I would rule that out completely. I also don't recall the ?? 'N. macrophylla' from Germany having them either. I don't think it's that plant.

To me it looks very N. lowii like in the pitcher, markings and leaf shape. Is the pitcher recently opened? It looks like a newly opened seedling N. lowii pitcher to me. They take a while to color up.. Could it be some sort of N. trusmadiensis? yes but odds are it's a N. lowii that was mistakenly mislabelled somewhere along the way. Time will tell!
 
  • #12
I have also seen a number of the seed-grown plants and, additionally, a number of photos presumably of N. macrophylla. A shot of a "striped" peristome "mac" was sent to me quite a while back -- though it is not exactly in the same vein as that juvenile plant . . .

N. macrophylla
Nepenthes_macrophylla_001_Copyright.jpg
 
  • #13
N. macrophylla can be quite variable in the coloration of the pitcher and peristome but if that is the one you say is "striped" then I don't see them. I still have not seen one ever having a single stripe like the plant in question or markings on the pitcher also visible on the plant in question.

Are we agreeing or not agreeing that it is not a N. macrophylla? To me it's clearly not. The ?N. macrophylla from Germany is very N. macrophylla like as well and this plant is very unN.macrophylla like. This plant in question has alot of N. lowii traits.. much more than any N. trusmadiensis I have seen also.
 
  • #14
Hiya Tony-

The pitcher opened up about a week ago.

You mentioned that the plant in question has more lowii traits, but what made me thought it could be a N. trumadiensis was a pic of JensB old TM, http://pics.nepenthes.se/forumpics/07.08/img_8826.jpg which I think is quite similar.

I can understand the leaf shape being lowii, but when I think lowii, I see a hairy under lid, which this pitcher doesn't and at 2", you figure you might see a couple of tiny strands or at least a some stubble (thats why I included a side and a beneath the lid shots).

But I guess like many plants in question, only time will tell. But I was trying to get is, a feel of what other people thought it might be.

Good Growing To Ya,
E

ps. Hey Tony, you wouldn't happen to have a spare N. mac laying around would ya . . . he, he, he.
 
  • #15
N. macrophylla can be quite variable in the coloration of the pitcher and peristome but if that is the one you say is "striped" then I don't see them. I still have not seen one ever having a single stripe like the plant in question or markings on the pitcher also visible on the plant in question.

Are we agreeing or not agreeing that it is not a N. macrophylla? To me it's clearly not. The ?N. macrophylla from Germany is very N. macrophylla like as well and this plant is very unN.macrophylla like. This plant in question has alot of N. lowii traits.. much more than any N. trusmadiensis I have seen also.

I thought that the consensus was that it was most likely Nepenthes x trusmadiensis, from the shape of the leaves as much as that of the pitchers . . .
 
  • #16
My first post I mention it could be a N. trusmadiensis. The leaves don't have the shape of any of the N. trusmadiensis I have seen though, which typically are move oval shaped. But this doesn't rule it out. At 2" you might or might not see bristles under the lid if it is N. lowii. Which is why I wouldn't rule out N. lowii yet either.

I see you have read Osmosis's thread on his 'N. macrophylla' from Germany. For others that may not have seen it. This is the plant in question and as I remember it is very N. macrophylla like and has no stripes either.
http://http://lhnn.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=s&action=display&thread=1624

What I find intriguing is that this is the first time I have seen this plant from the source you quote and labelled as N. macrophylla. The other plant in Osmosis's thread has been around alot and in a number of collections. I would think if it was being produced commercially in quantity all those years ago and released as N. macrophylla it would have turned up a number of times over by various people just like the other questionable clone. Which just further leads me to believe it is a mislabelled seedling or the source isn't what is claimed. Or Andreas may have released some seed grown individuals and this is just a one off odd natural hybrid??
 
  • #17
like i said on the other forum. its most likely the clone from wistuba that ended up being trusmadienses.

Point of clarification, Wistuba actually knows which clone is trusmadiensis and which is macrophylla because he sells them labeled specifically as such...
 
  • #18
I thought that the consensus was that it was most likely Nepenthes x trusmadiensis, from the shape of the leaves as much as that of the pitchers . . .

I would agree there is the possibility. The leaf shape to me doesn't indicate N. trusmadiensis however. Perhaps it is just the angle of the photo. But the leaves look considerably wider at the tips and the petiole is quite long. To me that is very N. lowii looking.

I also think that this pitcher is not a good example of what we should be looking at. I think it has not developed 100% having just been shipped and relocated. The plant is a good size though so I think in the next pitcher or two once it has settled in, we should see some nicely developed pitchers which will give a much better picture as to whether it is N. lowii or some sort of N. trusmadiensis.

---------- Post added at 11:14 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:11 AM ----------

Point of clarification, Wistuba actually knows which clone is trusmadiensis and which is macrophylla because he sells them labeled specifically as such...

Yes indeed he does now, but for many years they were shipped as N. macrophylla.

Does anyone have a photo of the plant he now ships labelled as N. trusmadiensis? Is it the same plant that for years was thought to be a N. macrophylla as in Osmosis's thread on Sams forum?

In either event this plant in question is too old to be from the stock he now ships as N. trusmadiensis.

---------- Post added at 11:17 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:14 AM ----------

hmm guess my link doesn't work ;/
 
  • #19
Yes indeed he does now, but for many years they were shipped as N. macrophylla.

Well I can say for the last 4 years he has had them labeled separately. So... 3-4 years ago what was shipped to the originator ought to have been properly labeled.

Does anyone have a photo of the plant he now ships labelled as N. trusmadiensis?

I am not 100% but I think Rattler may have one... I know he has the one that ships as macro now...
 
  • #20
It would deffinately be interesting to see photos of his plant he ships as N. trusmadiensis. I am not certain if it is the ?N. macrophylla or not. It could be an entirely different plant and perhaps is the plant we have in question here that was accidently mislabelled.

All I am saying is don't rule out N. lowii yet.
 
Back
Top