User Tag List

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

Thread: Fang

  1. #17

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    478
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Well, he has those two varieties, and I hear he just does the trade and orchid shows. I'll try to get him to start posting here.

  2. #18
    Guest
    Quote (BigCarnivourKid @ April 17 2003,04:52)
    Red Dragon is a cultivar or cultivated variety. It took years of selective breeding and inbreeding to develope the plant we all know as Red Dragon. The inbreeding is one of the reasons the Red Dragon is not as vigorous as some of the other varieties. The only way to reproduce it is vegetatively, ie, leaf cuttings, offshoots, and TC. That doesn't mean that its seeds won't produce a plant that resembles a true Red Dragon. But technically it is not a true Red Dragon as it is not a clone of the original Red Dragon. Anything produced sexually is technically refered to as an F1 seed/plant for the first generation, F2 for the second generation and so on. This indicates that it has Red Dragon parentage but is not a true Red Dragon. This is true of the other VFT cultivars also. None of them breed true. All you have is VFT seed with the influence of their particular parent.

    There was another thread posted not to long ago about this same subject. I will try to find it and post the link to it.[/QUOTE]
    First, a quick note about "years of selective breeding." It's actually the result of a single cross: "Holland Red" X 'Sawtooth.' Although, crossing these two plants should produce "typical/green" plants. I've often speculated that the 'Red Dragon' is the result of selfing the "Holland Red." Ron Gagliardo assures me that he removed all of the anthers from the "Holland Red" prior to making the cross.
    A second note about cultivars. While selfing the 'Red Dragon' will technically produce other clones, they too could potentially be called 'Red Dragon.' In terms of describing a cultivar, a plant simply needs to fit the description to be called the cultivar. This is why a cultivar description should be thorough and even include a picture. The description should be thorough enough to exclude similar plants. I know that this doesn't sound right but, this is the convention. Pedigree isn't even significant; if crossing the "cup" with a 'Fused Tooth' produced a plant that fit the cultivar description of the 'Red Dragon,' it too could be called 'Red Dragon.'
    Personally, I like to be sure of the exact clone. And I suspect this is the feeling of most people.
    imduff

  3. #19
    It's been one of dem days BigCarnivourKid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    I live in Chaffee County, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    3,673
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote (imduff @ April 17 2003,07:25)
    First, a quick note about "years of selective breeding." It's actually the result of a single cross: "Holland Red" X 'Sawtooth.'[/QUOTE]
    My bad [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif[/img] . Thanks for that info imduff. I could only remember what was stated in another similar discussion. I should have dug a little deeper.

    Quote
    Personally, I like to be sure of the exact clone. And I suspect this is the feeling of most people.[/QUOTE]
    Me too. I want the real thing, not someone's knock-off of it. While I might have the legal right to call a plant that I 'create' a Red Dragon, I feel that it would not be moral. No matter how much it looked like a Red Dragon.
    ---Steve Allinger---

    How come chicken fingers are bigger than buffalo wings?

    My Grow List

  4. #20

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    KANSAS
    Posts
    173
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I've noticed that alot of so called Varieties or 'Cultivars'
    don't look that much different from other varieties.

    I think much of it is profit driven; to one up the competition.
    When you put words in like GIANT or FANG; they sell!

  5. #21
    Guest
    Quote (BigCarnivourKid @ April 17 2003,5:09)
    Me too. I want the real thing, not someone's knock-off of it. While I might have the legal right to call a plant that I 'create' a Red Dragon, I feel that it would not be moral. No matter how much it looked like a Red Dragon.[/QUOTE]
    I guess you have to think about the criteria for naming a cultivar. Most importanty, it should be "unique." If the plant isn't unique, it shouldn't be named as a cultivar. This eliminates all these "so called" forms like "fang," "big mouth," etc. These plants really aren't much different from the "typical" forms.
    When Ron Gagliardo named 'Aki Ryu,' there wasn't much out there to confuse it with. Although now there are numerous "all red" clones out there.
    It might be easier to think of Sarracenia cultivars. 'Judith Hindle' is certainly unique. If by some stroke of luck, a plant is produced that fits into the cultivar description of 'Judith Hindle,' it can be called 'Judith Hindle.' In all likelyhood, the chances of producing such a plant are slim.
    Unfortunately, the nature of flytraps makes it difficult to distinguish one clone from another or even 2 clones as being the same.
    imduff

  6. #22

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Western MI USA
    Posts
    1,473
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Lightbulb

    Quote (imduff @ April 18 2003,01:10)
    [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif[/img]9-->
    Quote (BigCarnivourKid @ April 17 2003,5[img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif[/img]9)
    Me too. I want the real thing, not someone's knock-off of it. While I might have the legal right to call a plant that I 'create' a Red Dragon, I feel that it would not be moral. No matter how much it looked like a Red Dragon.[/QUOTE]
    I guess you have to think about the criteria for naming a cultivar. Most importanty, it should be "unique." If the plant isn't unique, it shouldn't be named as a cultivar. This eliminates all these "so called" forms like "fang," "big mouth," etc. These plants really aren't much different from the "typical" forms.
    When Ron Gagliardo named 'Aki Ryu,' there wasn't much out there to confuse it with. Although now there are numerous "all red" clones out there.
    It might be easier to think of Sarracenia cultivars. 'Judith Hindle' is certainly unique. If by some stroke of luck, a plant is produced that fits into the cultivar description of 'Judith Hindle,' it can be called 'Judith Hindle.' In all likelyhood, the chances of producing such a plant are slim.
    Unfortunately, the nature of flytraps makes it difficult to distinguish one clone from another or even 2 clones as being the same.
    imduff[/QUOTE]
    Big Mouths are registerd in Aulstralia. They are pritty distinctive.
    There is no item greater in value than life, for without life value would cease to exist.
    My Grow List

  7. #23

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Western MI USA
    Posts
    1,473
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    : $[Dionaea ' Akai Ryu ' {R.Gagliardo}]
    P: Carniv.Pl.Newslett.25:50 (1996)
    S: =[Dionaea muscipula {Soland. ex Ellis}]
    HC: Registered 10. 11. 1998 (JS)
    B: R.Gagliardo, Atlanta Bot. Gardens, before 1996
    Nominant: R.Gagliardo
    Registrant: R.Gagliardo
    Translation: [Dionaea ' Red Dragon ' {R.Gagliardo}] (English)
    Description: Carniv.Pl.Newslett.25:50 (1996)
    "Growth habit and flower morphology are typical for this species. The leaf petiole, blade and trap exhibit dark maroon to burgundy coloration. Any green coloration has only been noted around the center of the plant in mid-winter. The entire trap, interior and exterior, exhibits dark burgundy coloration throughout the year. Grown under laboratory conditions, where nutrient levels can be comparatively high, the plants still exhibit partial burgundy coloration in the traps and leaf blade."
    Standard: Carniv.Pl.Newslett.25:50 (1996)
    Propagation: vegetative reproduction (originally in vitro culture)
    Etymology: after red colouration of plants (Japanese: "Red Dragon")

    Wow, look at that, they changed it^ I pulled data on all the registerd varients of VFT a few months ago and it didn't have red dragons as vegitative. Cool... hey they updated some others too, nifty.
    There is no item greater in value than life, for without life value would cease to exist.
    My Grow List

  8. #24
    Guest
    Quote (Darcie @ April 17 2003,10:09)
    Big Mouths are registerd in Aulstralia. They are pritty distinctive.[/QUOTE]
    "Big Mouth" is not the best example because, it has been published but, it hasn't been registered. So, it's not quite a registered cultivar. As for it's uniqueness, I fail to see it. This is a nicely colored plant but, it certainly isn't unique for the species. What am I missing?
    imduff

    Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

    Similar Threads

    1. Fang Theory
      By Z.Z. in forum Tropical Pitcher Plants  (Nepenthes)
      Replies: 21
      Last Post: 03-22-2011, 09:43 AM
    2. Dionaea muscipula ‘Fang’ Seeds for Two First-Class Stamps
      By beautyreddragon in forum Carnivorous Plant Trading Post
      Replies: 2
      Last Post: 09-18-2008, 07:18 AM
    3. Would like to obtain 'fang' flytrap!
      By zoey in forum Carnivorous Plant Trading Post
      Replies: 0
      Last Post: 06-24-2003, 01:02 PM
    4. Fang
      By Tim in forum Tropical Pitcher Plants  (Nepenthes)
      Replies: 3
      Last Post: 04-14-2003, 05:15 PM

    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
    •