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!

Nepenthes "Sabre"

  • #21
Trusmadiensis is either lowii x macrophylla or macrophylla x lowii and thats it. If you cross lowii x tm its a lowii x tm the only difference would be that the cross is 3/4 lowii and 1/4 macrophylla.

There is no way in hell to get tm from crossing lowii x tm. There is no such thing as just because the parents are the same its a backcross and thus a tm. How a bout ventricosa x lowii x ventricosa? According to your reasoning its still a lowii x ventricosa because of backcrossing with vent and the parents are the same? The same applies to briggsiana
 
  • #23
The reasoning for this is that we don't know the exact parents of the hybrid, it's parents could have been xTM And xTM or a macrophylla and a xTM, or even Some much more complex cross. You might say, but wait! We know the parentage... It's lowii x xTM, well we don't the exact parentage of the xTM clone because it's from wild collected seed.
 
  • #24
I dont believe in that nonsense we know that most tms are lowii x macrophylla because rob collected lowii seeds and some macrophyllas were present at the location but it can clearly be seen that tms are not backcrosses themselves because they display equal lowii and macro traits thus if ep makes lowii x tm it is not a tm but a lowii cross tm
 
  • #25
It doesn't really matter what you believe in. We can never be entirely certain about the xTM clones, clone 1 has more macro traits and clone 2 has more lowii traits or it's the other way around (can't remember at the moment).
 
  • #26
Well we know for certain that lowii was the female parent. Havent you ever looked at lowii hybrids they are very variable. Like lowii x campy mine looks more like campy but my friends looks more like lowii, according to your reasoning two different plants mustve been used in producing the same cross
 
  • #27
Lowii hybrids are definetly variable but not nearly as much as the trusmadiensis that I have seen. Some look almost completely like lowii while other lean strongly on macrophylla. Keep in mind that this is also not black and white, it's a very confusing subject and will likely never be solved completely.
 
  • #28
I can explain that. The ones that look like lowii are lowii x macro the ones that look more like macro is macro x lowii as an example of this go look at the ask geoff mansell thread their male is a macrophylla x lowii but their female is lowii x macrophylla
 
  • #29
I'm talking about BE clone 1 and 2, I am pretty sure they are from the same batch of seed.
 
  • #30
Both are lowii x macrophylla
 
  • #31
What I am saying is that we can't be 100% certain, like I said one shows a lot more lowii and the other looks more like the classic lowii x macro.
 
  • #32
Wwll all i can say is its natural variability
 
  • #33
But like I said, it's extreme variability, much like complex hybrids.
 
  • #34
There are different rules for naturally occurring hybrids VS man-made hybrids, and it goes something like this:
The naturally occurring hybrid inermis X talangensis (cited recently in a discussion of this very topic) is called N. pyriformis. If, in the plant's natural habitat, the hybrid pyriformis gets crossed back to either of its parents (inermis or talangensis), the resulting hybrid is still called N. pyriformis, even though the proportion of each species is no longer 50/50. This is quite contrary to the nomenclature practices applied to man-made hybrids.

If a combination like this was performed by a hybridizer, such a back-crossing would be regarded as a completely new grex and given a new and unique name. The trick here (if there is one) is that the naming depends entirely on which came first, the naturally occurring hybrid, or the man-made one; the naturally occurring hybrid always takes precedent. So, if a hybridizer repeats the parentage of a known hybrid originating in the wild, he cannot name it as he pleases, it must follow the example of the naturally occurring hybrid.

That said, I am unclear whether or not one can take a select clone and assign it cultivar status, and if so, how.

I believe all of the statement above is correct and true, but if someone "in the know" finds fault in my statement, feel free to correct it.
 
  • #36
Thank you for clarifying whimgrinder.
 
  • #37
Just saw this post. I'm glade it arrived safe and sound, it looks like it has colored up nicely!

-Jeremiah-
 
  • #38
Thanks Jeremiah! I love this plant, thanks again. Here is a new pitcher in the sun, it is still coloring up
9e38d643.jpg
 
  • #39
Wicked. Do you know what clone it is?
Guess I'll contribute with a pic of my clone C

IMG_2523.jpg
 
  • #40
I do not know the clone but it seems similar to yours. Great plant by the way.
 
Back
Top