I am going to grow the red form soon and will give my opinion when I do. It looks a lot like D. sessilifolia to my eye.
Interesting plants, and cool name, LOL! It certainly appears to be very different from anything I have grown, and I would not be surprised if the plants are really D. x theocalyxinia (hope I spelled that right it looks funny) which is the name for the fertile hybrid between D. burmannii and D. sessilifolia.
That the two species are related has been shown conclusively by all the data, most recently by Fernando Rivadavia in his genetic studies (check my Drosera bibliography for the publication details). I am still waiting to hear how a plant from the Indo/Australian circut finds a home in Brazil though! It would be some wing flapping if it is via migratory birds!
I can only say but little regarding the behavior of these 2 species in cultivation, and they are general observations based on a finite number of plants.
D. sessilifolia has a deeper red coloration that definitely extends to the lamina (leaves) and not just the stalked glands. ALthough I have seen some well colored D. burmannii, the most coloration I have yet observed has been confined to the glands and edges of the lamina, not suffusing the entire plant as is the case with D. sessilifolia, as in Lauderdales photo of the red D. burmannii.
Grown very well, the largest D. sessilifolia I have seen was not as large as a quarter, but larger than a nickle. Commonly, they are much smaller. The color of the leaves is never green: always golden. It always flowers pink. I have never heard of a white flowered D. sessilifolia. The outermost sessile glands of D. sessilifolia are very long.
D. burmannii on the other hand grows much larger in all regards. Although it is often a distinct green in color, this seems variable in plants I have grown, with some becoming more golden in strong sun. The flowers are usually white, although pink flowered forms have been reported.
The entire presentation of D. burmannii is larger than D. sessilifolia: scapes are thicker in diameter, taller and more robust. D. sessilifolia has short scapes and small buds.
I have not compared the seed, since I await field collected material of D. sessilifolia (cultivated seed is atypical).
I have a very keen interest in acquiring material of D. burmannii from different populations with collection data attached, especially of the pink flowered forms. It is impossible to assess material from private collections, because hybridization is always a possible factor. Plants without collection data can never be anything other than rouges in that their character cannot be assumed to reflect the character of a population in habitat.
Still, they are all neat plants. Some of my most beautiful Drosera are rouges of this sort, with no collection data or certain purity, but they are beautiful for all of that. Most speak African.
Lauderdale PMed me with his concerns for spreading ambiguous material, and its great that growers keep these concerns in mind, while at the same time not losing sight of the fun part of things.
SO go for the plants, and always keep an open mind regarding plants with no locality data, (and often for those with such data as well!).
While I am on the subject, the reason for growers to be serious in their IDing of the plants is that when one can obtain a good representation of Drosera (as we all come to do), these accurate forms reflect an evolutionary trend spanning millions of years. You get a glimpse of this if you cultivate a lot of plants, but not so much if the ID's are confused, or the plants atypical. It's quite a rush sensing these relationships within this relatively small genus. It's a rare opportunity to be able to get to know a genus, and yet another joy the plants can give.
I am a serious grower, but I am also a fool for a pretty tentacle. C'mere baby, I think I'm all stuck on you.