User Tag List

Informational! Informational!:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 17 to 24 of 25

Thread: N. inermis

  1. #17

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    703
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Christian,

    That is kind of the basic premise, but as Rob mentioned, it is not quite that clear. As far as tissue cultured plants go, I do believe growers have a responsibility to identify the material prior to sale. Tissue culture is such a large scale process, and the number of potential buyers is so high that I think that a "buyer beware" warning, even in flashing lights, is not acceptable.

    However, Rob gave the example of jacquelineae and platychila. Rob released seed grown plants of both species for sale, which were too small for positive identification. In the case of jacquelineae, some of these turned out to be hybrids with izumiae. It is likely to happen with platychila as well, given the frequency with which Nepenthes cross pollinate with other species - growing wild collected seed in captivity *seems* to provide a higher germination and survival rate for hybrids, which may or may not survive in the wild.

    However, I think it needs to be a bit more specific. Saying a plant is seed raised does not give the buyer sufficient information about it's origins. Seed raised material can be 100% pure if the seed is from material pollinated in captivity between two pure, identified parents, and safeguards have been maintained to avoid contamination from other male flowers.

    However, I do think it needs to be made clear when seed is from wild collection. In the case of platychila, it seems self-evident that the seed would be from the wild, but probably only experienced growers would be aware of this. Those of us with long experience with these plants forget that not everyone can make the same informed conclusions. My suggestion would be that, where a vendor is selling material from wild seed, it should be noted as such, and a warning be placed that this means plants may be hyrbids. This would avoid any chance for confusion or disappointment from unsuspecting buyers.

    Hamish
    Demystifying Nepenthes: http://www.nepenthesforeveryone.com

  2. #18

    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    518
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    As a primary producer, we sometimes sell the newly intoduced seed-grown species as tiny plants, but almost exclusively wholesale, to nurseries run by people knowledgeable enough to work out for themselves the risks of resultant hybrids. Also, they usually grow them on for a long time and can tell if there is a problem before passing the plants on to the retail customer, who may have saved hard to be able to buy that new desirable species.

    The situation is very different in the case of tissue cultured plants. There is really little excuse for sending out plants from tissue culture that are hybrids and not the true species. By the time they come out of the flask into the nursery they are usually large and vigorous enough that after a few more leaves are produced and they are hard enough to ship, the pitchers are starting to exhibit mature characteristics. The reason we keep so many clones of each species in the lab is partly to guard against the risk of ending up with only hybrids in tissue culture. (Another reason to keep lots of clones in the lab is to get as wide a range of colorations as possible in the case of species that are very variable - Over 300 clones of N. ampullaria clog our lab shelves!).

    The N. thorelii issue is a good example where many vendors were selling a mislabeled species for several years in all good faith. We can only ever do anything to the best of our knowledge really. One of the fun aspects of Nepenthes is that not everything is known about them yet. Todays species may end up being tomorrows sub-species or even lumped together with another species. For example, N. echinostoma used to be a species and then it became N. mirabilis var. echinostoma. Perhaps some day it will be N. echinostoma again. Botanists live in a publish or perish world remember [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/new/smile_m_32.gif[/img]
    Rob Cantley
    Nep Nut in Sri Lanka
    http://www.borneoexotics.com

  3. #19

    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Missouri,zone 5b
    Posts
    3,134
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    What a waste Rob! I`m so sorry you had to do that That realy rots that he made you burn them
    [img]http://home.**********.com/users/pondboy/Neps/Neps%20sig..JPG[/img]

  4. #20
    MadAboutCPs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    232
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hamish, that is absolutely right where the grower has a responsibility for positively identifying a species or a hybrid prior to selling. That same rule should somewhat be applied to wild seeds that are collected and grown. Hence if the plant is too small for identifying, it simply should not be sold. Thorough research should be done meaning allowing the wild collected seeds to grow to a sufficient size and comparing them with photos and descriptions (or an information database) of a young plant of the same species or hybrid so that an informed decision can be made. Thus, there would be no confusion or disappointment.

    In relation to your suggestion:

    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]My suggestion would be that, where a vendor is selling material from wild seed, it should be noted as such, and a warning be placed that this means plants may be hyrbids. This would avoid any chance for confusion or disappointment from unsuspecting buyers.
    This would not solve the problem. For example, an individual purchases a platychila for $100.00 AU and later discovers it is a hybrid of platychila x jacquelineae which would cost $80.00 AU. 1) The customer did not receive what he purchased initially and 2) paid extra for an item that was improperly advertised. Purposely misleading or not, the product was not thoroughly checked before distribution. A customer would still feel mislead. If the cost was the other way around the customer may think they got a better deal, but that is beside the point of principle and business ethics. Furthermore, if someone thinks they are buying a macrophylla (being a slow grower) and two years later discovers its a hybrid, that is simply no good at all.
    If the matter of identifying was rectified on the growers side then there would be no problem.

    Rob: Hi. I definately understand that botanists live in a publish and perish world. You are doing a great job in supplying the rest of us great plants! Customers would appreciate it more if when they do fork out the money for the product, that it is the correct product and nothing less.
    The point where an individual begins selling to the public and making substantial profits in most cases means that they are a business as opposed to a hobbyist. Which thereby makes the vendor responsible for selling a mislabelled product.

    Anyway, better stop chatting now.

    Have a good one,
    Christian [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/new/smile_m_32.gif[/img]

  5. #21

    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Lincoln, NE
    Posts
    2,974
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rob,

    If you are still reading this thread, how many N. rajah clones do you have? I was in a chat room last night(along with Jeremiah) and somebody said there was only four in cultivation. There maybe only four true clipeata clones in cultivation, but I was pretty sure there are more clones of rajah than that.

    Cheers,

    Joe

  6. #22

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    703
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I know there are several growers in Australia, Germany and Japan with rajah grown from seed that was collected in the eighties, so there is definitely more than four clones in cultivation.
    Demystifying Nepenthes: http://www.nepenthesforeveryone.com

  7. #23

    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    518
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    We have the same 4 clones of N. rajah that everyone else has. They came from a German lab but were derived from the 4 clones that Kew gardens (sensibly IMO) gave out in the 1980's and which was then widely distributed.

    Unlike N. clipeata, N. rajah seed is very easy to collect if you know where to look, so there may be more clones around in sterile culture although their legality may be suspect since Sabah Parks are not noted for their willingness to give out collection permits, even for seeds.

    No doubt there are many plants in collections that are not from the 4 clones in sterile culture, especially some of the older plants that have been in botanic gardens and private collections for decades.
    Rob Cantley
    Nep Nut in Sri Lanka
    http://www.borneoexotics.com

  8. #24
    MadAboutCPs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    232
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    There are 5 rajah clones in cultivation that are available to the public. The others are just grown for independant use.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 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
  •