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!

Awesome hibrid idea!

Hey! Here is where you can post your great and creative hibrid ideas so others can make them and name them after you!

Well, here's my idea: Nepenths Lowii x Hamata x Veitchii
An inner-curved spikey peristome which is really flared on the outside of the pitcher, it's a decent size and color with a cool waist. Well, i'm assuming it would be a decent size, and i can safely assume a good color from it's hamata (lowers) and veitchii heritage. Good Growing!
P.S. If someone makes this, please name it the "anorexic shark". That would be an awesome name.
smile.gif
 
Hmmh, I think aristolochioides x truncata would be a fine hybrid, too
smile.gif
 
Often, the more complex a hybrid gets, the less inspiring it is. There are a few notable exceptions, but there's plenty of dross around supporting the proposition. It also depends on what you mean. Are you talking about (lowii x hamata) x veitchii, or lowii x (hamata x veitchii), or even (lowii x veitchii) x hamata.... All of them would look significantly different. Crossing lowii (a plant with striking lower peristome but virtually no upper peristome) with hamata would probably give you great lower pitchers, but doubtful uppers. To then cross it with veitchii, well the hamata teeth would probably almost invisible and would the lowii waisting, and the veitchii peristome would dominate. The best hybrids are those with features that complement or contrast each other, not those whose feature clash. Crossing a species with little or no peristome with one with a fantastic peristome will mostly give you a hybrid with a neither here not there peristome (i.e. you could albomarginata the "Species that Ate the Peristome", just look at its hybrids with northiana and veitchii).

You'd need some intensive selective breeding and back crossing to get complex hybrids that show the features you want in complex hybrids.

But that is me being a practical wet blanket....

Given my spiel, I'd be interested in seeing what hardy hybrid you'd get from inermis x campanulata, or campanulata x eymae (similar shaped species crosses of highland and lowland species), or hamata crossed with another species with prominent or remnant teeth, or jacquelineae or platchila crossed with veitchii, hurrelliana or northiana - they all have showy peristomes which may augment each other.
 
The idea of hybridisation is a great idea and it does occur in the wild with species found in the same area. A hybrid plant is unique in its own right.
Hybridisation in the long run is rather beneficial. It will result in stronger and tolerant plants, thus strengthening the gene pool.
Simplisticly (if there is such a word), crossing hybrids with the same hybrid or a specie to produce seeds of a pure species will result in genetic diversity.
Hybridising these plants will allow botanist to uncover new data and discover which characteristic is dominant over another species. For all we know, some species that exist today could be complex hybrids themselves and without this data, no-one will know.

A complex hybrid I would be interested in is:

N. (aristolochioides x hamata) x (campanulata x lowii)

And the hybrids themselves.
 
Interesting points, although not all your points appear to be borne out by several hundred years of hybridisation in cultivation and field observations of Nepenthes.

There is a phenomenon known as hybrid vigour, which does appear in some Nepenthes hybrids, principally f1 hybrids (hybrids between pure species). However, hybrids do not appear to be as fertile as species, and the lack of fertility increases with the complexity of the hybrid. The more complex the hybrid, the less seed that is set, and the less that germinates.

Whilst hybridisation does occur in the wild, they don't seem to form dominant populations, or succeed overall. Anecdotal evidence in the field would indicate that complex hybrids are rarely, if ever, seen in the wild, and that hybrids don't interbreed well with the parent species. Hybrids do appear, but the parent species win out overall. Remember that species have evolved to fill ecological niches through natural selection over huge time periods. Hybrids generally don't have the full matrix of attributes needed for their niche, so generally can't outperform the parent species.

As to whether hybridisation gives rise to new species, I can only speculate. I would hazard a guess it has more to do with divergence within a population than hybridisation, although the latter may play a part (evolution in other species appears to come from variation within a population, rather than an influence from an external one). Genetic analyses may provide some answers there. An interesting area for future study.
 
Hi all:

Interesting topic for discussion. Genetic diversity only comes from the random and/or environmentally influences on an individual: in this case a nep.
Divergence within a population can only occur through mutation. This is an extremely rare event and it will take several spontaneous changes in a DNA sequence or group of sequences within a genome of an individual to look, behave and function significantly different from others of the original pure population. Furthermore, it is well known that pure species found in the wild, very much isolated, tend to be more fragile and can disappear more quickly if there happens to be a drastic change in its original habitat, not to mention the potential  genetic aberrations and malformations in individuals who breed with others within a single and isolated population.

Mixing genes from two distinct population of plants enhances the chances of their survival, because the individual plants have a larger pool of genetic information which could potentially confers a selective advantage over others.

My guess is that in the wild, only those crosses which confer hybrid vigour would have a selective advantage over those crosses which don't. Mother nature takes care of everything in a very subtle way.

BTW, truncata X aristolochioides hybrids do exist.

Gus
 
I still think that if hybridisation were such a successful evolutionary strategy, there'd be evidence in the field of hybrid speciation on a regular basis, which there doesn't appear to be. The mere fact that hybrids are not as fertile as species gives a good clue as to why.

As for fragility, well that's an inevitable consequence of adaptation to a particular environment. It is interesting to note that some Nepenthes seem to be highly adapted to a very particular geographical niche, whereas mirabilis is the catch-all variety which fills in the gaps. It would be interesting to discover whether it is a progenitor species, or a successful "sibling".

How much evolutionary genetic study has there been done on Nepenthes anyway? And is there any difference between plant evolution and animal evolution?? Gus, what you say about genetic mutation being rare is interesting, and hybridisation giving rise to genetic diversity also sounds logical. But that seems to infer that speciation arises from hybridisation, not evolution (in the genetic differentiation sense). Is that your thesis?

Hamish
 
Gus, you pretty much sumed up what I was going to say.
smile.gif


They are most definately interesting points to ponder. Without hybridising and backcrossing, it would eventually result in a weaker gene pool (inbreeding is not healthy). Referring to anecdotal evidence the population of Nepenthes is decreasing as a result of deforestation and just stupid people that overlook these plants growing in the habitat they are clearing for land. A few are endangered species and roughly 70% of Nepenthes turn out to be males (they'd most definately be competing to show the female whose seed pod is better!). Variation can arise within a species or a hybrid, however evolution occurs through natural mutations (being stress related or another factor). Wether they survive in the wild or not is another story and will result in natural selection. Nepenthes are much more tolerant of temperatures and humidity than they have been given credit for.

How does one prove that wild collected seeds of a Nepenthes species that exist today have not been back crossed? For example, N.(ampullaria x rafflesiana) x (ampullaria x rafflesiana) This itself may result in variation within the seeds. But only further research will answer everyone's questions.

As you mentioned, hybrid vigour does appear in some Nepenthes hybrids. Not all. In most cases the hybrid will exhibit the traits of both parents but not to the degree of the species themselves. This does not make the hybrid, inferior. In the case of a donkey and a horse you get a mule which is infertile. The fact that seeds can still be produced gives a far greater chance of survival than something that cannot reproduce at all.
Remember nepenthes have developed a seed structure that can be carried by the wind over great distances.

Genetic analyses will definately assist in identifying a plant, especially prior to sale!
 
Great discussion, gentlemen!
There is no doubt Nepenthes exhibit hybrid vigor, but its an observation made under horticultural conditions. I live in a lowland area, making highland species difficult to grow with out a costly cooling system. What is interesting to note: many highland hybrids grow trouble free in our environment where either parent would suffer or perish. When a highland species is crossed to a lowland species, the resulting hybrid has a wide temperature tolerance range, not a narrow "intermediate" range. I'm sure a cross like inermis x campanulata would result in progeny that are easier to grow than either parent.

Trent
 
  • #10
Hi all:

Regarding the hybrid vigour yes, we found it in cultivation, but let's not forget that we do find natural hybrids. Perhaps hybrid vigour is initially displayed by any newly made hybrid until it finds it habitat once it has settled into its favourite spot, this so called vigour diminishes and the new plant population stabilises. Since Neps habitats are pretty much taken by other species and hybrids, it'd be pretty difficult to follow these "hypothetical stages", but competition in nature remains and any nep showing signs of "weakness" such as not producing enough seed or seedlings displaying weak growth may eventually be selected out or extinguished.


It is a real shame that genetic analysis are not readily available for the identification of neps.
I am puzzled by the fact that we call N. mirabilis about 10-15 different types of nepenthes with pitchers that do look like pretty much different from each other and yet we speciate things like tentaculata and murudensis when they look very similar under my very eyes.

Gus
 
  • #11
I've always wonder what a (bical x Truncata) x Bical would look like. Whether o rnot itwould have the size/shape of truncata with the fangs of a bical
 
  • #12
Hamish:

I missed your last point. Evolution is not the product of hybridisation nor the product of genetic mutations, but a combination of both. I do believe however, that new species may be the product of stable hybrids with a couple of those useful mutations we mentioned earlier. pure mutations may also give rise to new species, but they are limited by the small gene pool available to them as opposed to a larger one available from hybrid individual.

Pretty stable environments with little or none environmental pressure may have been responsible for the origins of diatas, densiflora, and singalana (possible mutations), which look very much alike, while environments with more selective pressure may have given rise to Hamata ( tentaculata X nep with large teeth). Thus, depending on the environment either mutations or hybrids with a couple of these genetic changes may have given rise to new species.

Gus
 
  • #13
[b said:
Quote[/b] (agustinfranco @ Nov. 05 2004,6:16)]Pretty stable environments with little or none environmental pressure may have been responsible for the origins of diatas, densiflora, and singalana (possible mutations), which look very much alike, while environments with more selective pressure may have given rise to Hamata ...
Every environment has pressure. Survival or the fittest. Those Neps you describe as ‘simple’ are in fact optimal for their environment. Hamata’s teeth look very sophisticated to us but they are not really more difficult to make than a wide perristome of a Veitchii for example...
 
  • #14
hey does anyone actually own a nep hybrid with hamata in it.
 
  • #15
Phyrex;

Perhaps no selection pressure is a bit over board, but there are ecosystems with little selection pressure. those are the ones that become extinct if there is a major shake up in the food chain.   there are different degrees of selection pressure in different ecosystems and we can't say that all the environments go through the same changes. The problem is that we can't measure these things up with a ruler or a calculator to some extent.

Regarding Hamata's teeth, it seems to be an advantageous trait for a Nep to have. So far we have witnessed two different species with the same trait. When you mention the word optimal for the environment in which they live, yes i agree, but optimal functionality of a structure (in this case hamata's teeth) is relative to the environmental pressure and a bit of randomness which the plant is subjected to. The moment that those teeth are not needed anymore, they will be gone very easily.

Gus
 
  • #16
[b said:
Quote[/b] (agustinfranco @ Nov. 05 2004,10:11)]Regarding Hamata's teeth, it seems to be an advantageous trait for a Nep to have.
Yeah, those ‘simpler species’ you’ve mentioned probably don’t do well in the Hamata environment but it’s also the other way around...

You see, those teeth are useless when there aren’t ants around that fall off them and feed the plant.
smile.gif

And it does require the plant energy to create those teeth. When this Hamata is competing against other plants which are optimal for their environment and the hamata is also wasting energy without gaining a benefit it surely won’t last very long (evolutionary long).

I know what you mean with advantageous but in this case(/environment) being simple and efficient has the upper hand.
smile_m_32.gif
 
  • #17
[b said:
Quote[/b] (SydneyNeps @ Nov. 05 2004,4:31)]Whilst hybridisation does occur in the wild, they don't seem to form dominant populations, or succeed overall.  Anecdotal evidence in the field would indicate that complex hybrids are rarely, if ever, seen in the wild, and that hybrids don't interbreed well with the parent species. Hybrids do appear, but the parent species win out overall.
Anecdotal evidence indeed but there's a lot of it.  I've seen several complex hybrids in the wild but they are very rare in my experience.  However, out of 24 clones from N. bicalcarata seed we kept in the lab we had the following appear:

9 clones of "typical" orange N. bicalcarata
2 clones of a red N. bicalcarata
1 clone of a squat red N. bicalcarata with unuasually short fangs, not an F1 hybrid IMO.
5 clones of N. bicalcarata x (N. gracilis x ampullaria) - nice!
6 clones of N. bicalcarata x gracilis
1 clone of N. bicalcarata x ampullaria

Seed was  from a collection of just part of a single head.  The balance seeds that was planted out in the nursery also yielded some really strange plants that are evidently complex hybrids probably involving N. mirabilis var. echinostoma and N. ampullaria. I've never seen most of these varieties in the wild despite living amongst these plants in habitat for a decade.

These F1 and complex N. bicalcarata hybrids we have are *very* vigorous in the nursery but rare in the wild?  Why should that be?  My guess is that the pitcher form, coloration or nectar gland distribution just isn't attractive enough to insects to enable them to compete in the hostile environment they naturally occur in.
 
  • #18
Rob, that's exactly the same observation made by other propagators of wild seed - whilst hybrids don't seem common in the wild, they are very common in cultivated seed. That would seem to indicate that, as you mention, competitive pressure in the wild sees them fail. Put them in a lab with all the support and protection they could possibly get, and hey presto. I'd say your surmise about not being able to effective attract prey is spot on. There is evidence that different Nepenthes species attract different insect species (which seems logical, as you'd find a niche which doesn't compete with another species). So if you cross a termite feeder with an ant feeder, then you may get a species that attracts neither sufficiently.

Your example also shows that female Neps are big trollops when it comes from taking any old pollen! But there must be strong factors involved in species dominance - in some areas where you find bical, amps, gracilis, mirabilis etc in a very confined area, if hybrids were such an evolutionary winner, then the species would soon interbreed themselves out of existence. As they tend to survive despite constant interbreeding, it shows the hybrids rarely come to the fore.

Also, the speciation that can be seen occurring in a single progenitor species location like in Australia would seem to be evidence of speciation occurring from mutations within populations, rather than genetic influences from without.

I must say I'm enjoying thread, it's the first intelligent discussion that has arisen for quite a while and the views have been cogent and stimulating

smile.gif
 
  • #19
Hi all;

Let's go back to the main point of the discussion. The fact that one sees more hybrids in TC than they occurred in the wild, my guess is that it has been discussed in a thread a couple of weeks ago. Competitive environment occurs in the wild while a TC flask is a free for all to grow. It is very clear from Rob's bicalcarata clones that the female bicalcarata flower takes up a lot of pollen and from different sources. Why only few of these grow in the wild while, all of them grow in TC?. Of course environmental selective pressure would allow only those that adapt to the environment very quickly as opposed to those which they'd have a hard time to grow and develop in such a competitive environment.

those hybrids which don't normally make it to the stage of plantlets will perish, but they will be made again next year and the next until these find a way to overcome the obstacles and become dominant. When and how?, well it'd depend on the environmental circumstances while germinating.

Regarding the species found in Australia: Mirabilis and Mirabilis var rowanae or N. rowanae as some growers call it, still is debatable. I was originally convinced that N. rowanae was a true species, but the fact that there is a N. Viking from Thailand with similar if not almost identical characteristics of Rowanae around and some of its variants just as it occurs with Rowanane would make anybody think twice about these being in fact new species rather than two mirabilis hybrids!

Rowanae and Viking could just be complex hybrids that are evolving to species. Now to make things more interesting, i would like to bring up the fact that the description of species

a group of organisms that have a unique set of characteristics (like body shape and behavior) that distinguishes them from other organisms. If they reproduce, individuals within the same species can produce fertile offspring.

Individuals from different species can't interbreed. Then why this happens with Nepenthes. Are we dealing with species or subspecies? Maybe they all belong to one Genus Nepenthes and one species. Actually two or three since nobody has been able to hybridize N. pervillei and N. viellardii.

Gus
 
  • #20
Hi there,

this is a really interesting discussion!!

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]It is a real shame that genetic analysis are not readily available for the identification of neps.

With this genetic analysis identification would be very easy. But that's almost impossible. You have to know all the DNA of all neps. (How many chromosoms does Nepenthes have?) Its the point that nepenthes have dominant and recessive alleles. So e.g. veitchii has a dominant allele in the large peristome and a hybrid of veitchii and jaquelinae perhaps would be unspectacular because the dominant alleles of both would be canceled. With this fact identification of neps would be easy if you know all dominant or recessive alleles.
 
Back
Top