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!

Location data question

  • Thread starter adrian
  • Start date
Okay, this may be a silly question, but why are people so hung up on knowing the location data for plants, and why are those plants so coveted. I've noticed on some people's growlists that they have many of plant X from different locations - what is the fascination with this?
 
For the same reason we seek out slightly different looking hybrids instead of easy to obtain plants; we're off our rockers!

Okay, this may be a silly question, but why are people so hung up on knowing the location data for plants, and why are those plants so coveted. I've noticed on some people's growlists that they have many of plant X from different locations - what is the fascination with this?
 
There are a variety of reasons:

Some area populations have outstanding features such as Sarracenia oreophila from the area known as "Sand Mountain" (dark veining in the tubes). Or Drosera capillaris from Pasco Co, FL (known for it's size aka "Pasco Giant").

Some of the habitats have been destroyed or the wild population no longer exists. If the habitat should ever be restored then the carnivorous plant population may possibly be restored from plants in peoples collections.

The intrinsic value (not necessarily monetary value) of most things is more if it has a known provenance.
 
For the same reason we seek out slightly different looking hybrids instead of easy to obtain plants; we're off our rockers!

so here's another question - why obtain slightly different looking hybrids instead of very different hybrids? Maybe this is just a personal preference - I would rather have more different varieties instead of just many similar plants... I understand repopulating previously destroyed areas, but couldn't that be done with any plant of the same species? Or is it just on principle that one would want to repopulate with the same plants that were removed from an area?

I guess I'm also confused about things having more intrinsic value if you know where they come from - not trying to be argumentative, just curious.
 
You're right, when it comes to deciding what to have in your collection its personal preference. Most people who've never seen a sundew can't tell the difference between d. capensis and d. multifida "extrema". To those people I shrug and say "grow the one you think is the prettiest". On the other end of the spectrum there are people who give names to every plant in their collection. European collectors of Sarracenia are maniacs!

Genetic diversity is useful in wild populations to maintain vigor. Some plants are born with disease, drought, pest resistance and some aren't. When repopulating bogs its considered best practice to collect seed from any remaining plants in that location to grow replacements. That said, I can't tell you whether a handful of plant collectors could participate in a re-introduction project. I'm not a botanist but my impression is that it is unlikely!
 
What I find interesting is that a lot of folk in the UK seem to have more location specific plants than most US collectors.Or am i jest not looking at the right growlists?
 
This is basically asking why do you collect stamps, they are all sticky and worth a few cents. Well I don't know why they do that ???. Silly people :-D.

I've been looking for a portion of Utric. heterosepala for a while it looks just like Utric. graminifolia (which I have) and without a microscope good luck telling the two apart. So why do I want it.....ummm....yea.....I do....there!

I also collect variations of Epidendrum porpax, don't really know why, I like the plant so instead of growing a ton of the same plant I'm growing variations of that same plant.

This doesn't really make sense I know, but neither does paying more for something just because 10 years ago someone marked down where it came from, but I will pay more for it if I think they did.

To sum up......

:crazy:
 
I tend to agree with the prior posters on most of their points. (Lois - you're right about the Europeans - but there are a few of us here in the states who also value this info ...). Here's one 'hypothetical' progression that a new CP owner might make ....

Once you start growing Sarrs, it's likely, at some point, that you'll want to have a representative from each species (there's not that many species & you've noticed that some are really different (ie: psit) and some are pretty similar (flava & oreo)). Once you have one from each species, you find that there are some significant variations within species (like S. flava var atropurpurea, cuprea, rubricorpora, maxima (silly name), rugelii) - so now you probably want a plant which represents each 'significant' variety within some (maybe all?) species.

By now, you have quite the collection. It has taken some time, effort & possibly money to get this collection & along the way - you've spent some time studying these plants. While studying the plants, maybe you notice that your one variety of S. flava var atropurpurea (all red flava) develops with a deep red lid and a weaker red on the tube when it emerges and another does just the opposite (deep red on the tube and the lid darkens a bit later). So now, you're curious. You've noticed something that you haven't seen discussed anywhere or noticed in pics (of course not in pics - people will only show pics after the red is really deep on both plants). In your studying, you notice that the location for one plant is in Florida but you don't have any location info for the other. However, the other plants that start their development with a red lid (var cuprea) in your collection are from North Carolina. Hmmm... Knowing this little tidbit allows you to extrapolate that the plant with the lid that darkens later may be an extension of the var rubricorpora (red-tube) population around Appalachicola and your other plant may be from a North Carolina population*. Either way, you start to realize that having location info (that you may have previously considered silly or overly meticulous) was potentially good info to have.

In addition, by now, you've been trading & interacting with other CP hobbiest for a while & you've noticed that some of the folks with the larger collections place a priority on location info - sometimes - so much so - that they don't even want a plant unless it has this info... aka: if you don't have the location info, they don't want to trade & if you do, you can often get more for a plant that has the info (ie: the 'CP currency' is greater).

As the others have noted, it's really a matter of choice or preference. For me, as I've collected plants, I've found that the more information I have on the plants (location, previous owners, specific seed clone**, sex ***, etc), the more valuable they are to me and potentially to others. Getting this info at the beginning of a trade is frequently quite simple - while tracking it down later is often impossible (try getting info from Chuck Lyons about that petio you bought 2 years ago or on that Nep from Henning von Schmeling). On other aspects of the hobby - we all have different preferences (ie: Swords w/ the cool / weird succulents) and sometimes these preferences change with time. Why am I now interested in the Iperua Utrics when I've had no interest in them previously?

Interesting stuff ....


* - this little story is roughly analogous to discoveries with my 2 S. flava plants (codes 43 & 46 - pics on my growlist)
** - in Sarrs, at least one study has shown reduced growth from selfed plants. In other species (like the Drosera petiolaris complex) - 2 different seed clones are required to even produce viable seed.
*** - Nepenthes are dioecious plants. A N. hamata recently sold for $735 on ebay. Given the dearth of females for this species & it's tremendous popularity - knowing that your plant was a female would likely enhance the value a bit .... (or a bit more than a bit)... :0o:
 
so here's another question - why obtain slightly different looking hybrids instead of very different hybrids? Maybe this is just a personal preference - I would rather have more different varieties instead of just many similar plants... I understand repopulating previously destroyed areas, but couldn't that be done with any plant of the same species? Or is it just on principle that one would want to repopulate with the same plants that were removed from an area?

I guess I'm also confused about things having more intrinsic value if you know where they come from - not trying to be argumentative, just curious.

Each native plant population is tuned to cooperate with its local environment. Nature has spent thousands or millions of years finding the right mixture of plants and animals for every natural ecosystem, and as good as we are human science has yet to come up with viable shortcuts. Sometimes the differences between two plants of the same species but different locations is fairly small, but there's no good way to tell upon casual inspection whether or not any given plant has an important unique characteristic that needs to be preserved. It's safe practice to use native stock when repopulating a disturbed ecosystem, because you never know what will become the next cane toad.
I suppose the intrinsic value added by knowing where something comes from is roughly the same as knowing any other major detail about it. Things generally aren't very useful unless you know something about them. A key isn't of much use if you don't know what lock it belongs to; it's of even less use if you don't know what a key is to begin with.
~Joe
 
Back
Top