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!

Darlingtonia x Sarracenia?

NeciFiX

Kung Fu Fighting!
These two are obviously closely related (even in the same family!) and S. psittacina is probably (by physical traits) one of the more closely related to Darlingtonia, and even their flowers are relatively the same, could a cross be done between the two?

Thanks!

~NeciFiX
 
No. As of yet the only intergeneric cross has been made with Drosera and Dionaea and the seedings died quickly after germination.

You can always try if you want. You might get lucky and get a weak abomination lmao. Don't count on it, though. Not without genetic engineering.
 
As of yet the only intergeneric cross has been made with Drosera and Dionaea and the seedings died quickly after germination.

Woah. I never heard this. You got a link?

xvart.
 
Drosera and Dionaea don't APPEAR as related as Sarracenia and Darlingtonia. S. psittacina (again, physical assumption) APPEARS to be more closely related to Darlingtonia than most since they employ the exact same trapping mechanism (if it weren't for the size, some colouration aspects, the fangs, and the differences in the flowers I couldn't tell the difference!). They are in the same family, too. I don't have a mature S. psittacina or Darlingtonia or any other Sarracenia since Cooks plants are usually immature, however, I will go for it! I probably will get a weak hybrid that dies in a week or two, but it's worth a try! Now, just to pull my Darlingtonia and S. psittacina inside when they flower in a year or two so those bumblebees (I was blessed to see TWO of them, or the same one just on different days), cute little furry black and yellow bumblebees pollinating the nice looking (they look nicer than Utric flowers, these dumb weeds that grow here, kind of like Orchids, that's why I don't need pretty flowers! I got them in my backyard!) purple flowers running rampant like a weed. Aw. And this was happening when I was potting a S. leucophylla x (flava x leucophylla).
 
Drosera and Dionaea don't APPEAR as related as Sarracenia and Darlingtonia. S. psittacina (again, physical assumption) APPEARS to be more closely related to Darlingtonia than most since they employ the exact same trapping mechanism (if it weren't for the size, some colouration aspects, the fangs, and the differences in the flowers I couldn't tell the difference!).

You shouldn't assume that just because they look the same, they are more related. Some chameleons have three horns on their head with a crest, just like a Triceratops. Does that mean that they are closely related? No. Similarities pop up in evolution all the time.

-Ben
 
Here is a thread I made when I was 13, 4 years ago. Ahh such memories. Look at my poor capitalization skills. I was such a newb back then. Look at my enthusiasm. Alas, now I only have the melodramatic emo impressions of a angstful teenager scorned. Woe upon me.

Man these antihistamines are doin' somethin' crazy to me, foo.

http://terraforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=86393&highlight=intergeneric

For those of you who are lazy, here is something from the listerve by Ivan Snyder 7 years ago.



Archive-Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 08:59:14 -0800
Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 08:58:46 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <20000812.085503.-11307.3.bioexp@juno.com>
Reply-To: cp@opus.labs.agilent.com
Sender: cp@opus.labs.agilent.com
From: Ivan Snyder <bioexp@juno.com>
To: Multiple recipients of list
Subject: re: Drosera regia - Dionaea Relation


>Hey listserver,Does anyone know the chromosome count
>on D.regia and D.muscipula.I think they are
>related.The flowers and seed are very similar.In
>D.muscipula the pollen is ready before the plant is
>receptive.The same is true in D.regia.Sometimes I even
>get the seed mixed up.Pretty soon I will make the
>cross.Petiolaris Sean

Jan:
>They definietly are. Besides the morphological similarities, genetic
>alignments place _D. regia_ (and not _D. falconeri_ or any other
>Lasiocephala; Hi Ivan, I do not buy your theory - but I doubt you
>believed I would, anyway&#33 at the very base of the genus _Drosera_,
>quite close to _Dionaea_.

Hi all, Ivan here,
This is a subject I find especially interesting. In the 1985 CPN December
issue I wrote the article 'Evolution of the Venus' Flytrap'. In the
article I detailed the evolutionary steps from sundew to VFT. At the
time, Drosera falconeri had recently been discovered. When I submitted
the article, Joseph Mazrimas wrote me that he felt that D. falconeri
might be an ancestor of VFT. After studying the plant myself, I do not
believe this is true. Still, the similarity in my hypothetical drawing in
the article, as Mr. Mazrimas suguested, is astonishing. This is why I say
that D. falconeri is representative of a missing link, though not
actually the genuine article.

After much study I feel that D. regia is the most closely related sundew
to VFT. In addition to the shared characteristics mentioned by Sean and
Jan here are the pollen. D. regia pollen is unlike any other sundew and
most like that of VFT. The chromosome counts are especially telling (if
correct). In biology there is a general rule in respect to archaic
species which have developed into more moderns and differing by one pair
of chromosomes, such as this case, VFT = 32, D. regia = 34. The older
species will actually have the higher count. This is because it is more
simple to lose a pair rather than gain one. This rule holds true with the
aboriginal horse having one pair of chromosomes more than the
domesticated horse. Also consider the chimpanzee has one pair more than
we Humans. Incedently, the wild horse ancestor and domestic horse may
interbreed and often produce fertile offspring, despite the chromosome
difference.

I have tried cross pollinations of many different sundews with VFT. All
will be surprised to hear that some did cross, though the hybrids did not
survive long. I have not had flowering of D. regia and VFT simultaneously
yet. I feel that maybe these two might be most compatible.
 
Drosera36: I put "by physically" in parentheses because I was just adding that so my theory would sound better instead if I put S. something or something there (and that sentence is flawed.) But, I know, I was probably wrong anyways.

JustLikeAPill: I hate you.

Here is a thread I made when I was 13, 4 years ago. Ahh such memories. Look at my poor capitalization skills. I was such a newb back then. Look at my enthusiasm. Alas, now I only have the melodramatic emo impressions of a angstful teenager scorned. Woe upon me.

Man these antihistamines are doin' somethin' crazy to me, foo.

http://terraforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=86393&highlight=intergeneric

For those of you who are lazy, here is something from the listerve by Ivan Snyder 7 years ago.



Archive-Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 08:59:14 -0800
Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 08:58:46 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <20000812.085503.-11307.3.bioexp@juno.com>
Reply-To: cp@opus.labs.agilent.com
Sender: cp@opus.labs.agilent.com
From: Ivan Snyder <bioexp@juno.com>
To: Multiple recipients of list
Subject: re: Drosera regia - Dionaea Relation


>Hey listserver,Does anyone know the chromosome count
>on D.regia and D.muscipula.I think they are
>related.The flowers and seed are very similar.In
>D.muscipula the pollen is ready before the plant is
>receptive.The same is true in D.regia.Sometimes I even
>get the seed mixed up.Pretty soon I will make the
>cross.Petiolaris Sean

Jan:
>They definietly are. Besides the morphological similarities, genetic
>alignments place _D. regia_ (and not _D. falconeri_ or any other
>Lasiocephala; Hi Ivan, I do not buy your theory - but I doubt you
>believed I would, anyway&#33 at the very base of the genus _Drosera_,
>quite close to _Dionaea_.

Hi all, Ivan here,
This is a subject I find especially interesting. In the 1985 CPN December
issue I wrote the article 'Evolution of the Venus' Flytrap'. In the
article I detailed the evolutionary steps from sundew to VFT. At the
time, Drosera falconeri had recently been discovered. When I submitted
the article, Joseph Mazrimas wrote me that he felt that D. falconeri
might be an ancestor of VFT. After studying the plant myself, I do not
believe this is true. Still, the similarity in my hypothetical drawing in
the article, as Mr. Mazrimas suguested, is astonishing. This is why I say
that D. falconeri is representative of a missing link, though not
actually the genuine article.

After much study I feel that D. regia is the most closely related sundew
to VFT. In addition to the shared characteristics mentioned by Sean and
Jan here are the pollen. D. regia pollen is unlike any other sundew and
most like that of VFT. The chromosome counts are especially telling (if
correct). In biology there is a general rule in respect to archaic
species which have developed into more moderns and differing by one pair
of chromosomes, such as this case, VFT = 32, D. regia = 34. The older
species will actually have the higher count. This is because it is more
simple to lose a pair rather than gain one. This rule holds true with the
aboriginal horse having one pair of chromosomes more than the
domesticated horse. Also consider the chimpanzee has one pair more than
we Humans. Incedently, the wild horse ancestor and domestic horse may
interbreed and often produce fertile offspring, despite the chromosome
difference.

I have tried cross pollinations of many different sundews with VFT. All
will be surprised to hear that some did cross, though the hybrids did not
survive long. I have not had flowering of D. regia and VFT simultaneously
yet. I feel that maybe these two might be most compatible.
 
In the March 2007 issue of the Carnivorous Plant Newsletter (vol. 36< no. 1) there is a article "Droseraceae Gland and Germination Patterns Revisted: Support for Recent Molecular Phylogenetic Studies" reviews many of the studies on the relationship of the genera and species in the family Droseraceae. The family includes Dionaea, Drosera and Aldrovanda.

Strange how some people accept the molecular studies that show the relationships in the family Drosceraceae but not the molecular studies that indicate Sarracenia rubra is a different species from S. purpurea ssp purpurea and ssp venosa.
 
What's your problem dude? Everyone loves me. I'm the Pillman. What did I say to piss you off?
 
  • #10
Hey, scientist are just begining to learn that classification isn't all that that simple...I mean ever since we discovered the kuiper belt we now know that the universe isn't as simple as a sun, a planet, and a moon...basically where I'm getting at is that the whole genus,species, sub-species thing probably has a lot more to it than we currently know. look at the venus fly trap and aldrovanda for example: I know they're both completley seperate genuses but look at how strikingly similar they are. There may possibly be two random genuses (spelling?) that could actually somehow intermix, but we may never find out... don't get your hopes up though, but hey, it's always worth a shot... I mean that's what science is right?
 
  • #11
Strange how some people accept the molecular studies that show the relationships in the family Drosceraceae but not the molecular studies that indicate Sarracenia rubra is a different species from S. purpurea ssp purpurea and ssp venosa.

Hey Not,

I think you mean S. rosea :p S. rubra si so deffinitly a different species that no one ever thought it was in the purpurea group :)

The reason those people are so ready to grasp molecular studies for VFTs/Aldrovanda/Drosera is because we are mostly dealing with "groupers". They like to group things together. So of course any molecular data that makes a group is wanted while data the splits up a group is ignored.

IMO (not that you asked) I don't think S. rosea deserves full on species status but I would happily accept it as S. purpurea ssp. rosea.
 
  • #12
Yeah but it takes longer to type and say :) I agree though, it's cute but nothing special.

Neon, plants make intergeneric hybrids often. Orchids for example. Oh and it's genera not genuses :)
 
  • #13
Why doesn't anyone try Darlingtonia x Sarracenia or Aldrovanda x Dionaea and take one crop and put them in an Aldrovandaish water, some on wet soil, and different conditions between the two and see whatcha get!
 
  • #14
Because it's not that simple. Plants have different chromosome numbers and just like humans when the chromosomes don't match and one is missing the fetus usually dies and there is a miscarriage , or the fetus dies before the woman misses her period so she never knew she was pregnant to begin with. On the flip side if a human fetus has an extra chromosome 21 chromosome for example, it would have down syndrome. You can't just go all willy-nilly and expect plants to make hybrids when the chromosomes don't match up. It's like a chemistry equation, things must be balanced. Plants have more chromosomes than humans sometimes so things become even more complicated. These scenarios are assuming fertilization even takes place.


That's exactly like saying "Let's cross a donkey and a lizard and take half of the babies and put them under a rock and the other half and put them on a farm and see what we get".
 
  • #15
LOL.

Of course, I knew that, I was just testing you. *nods head like I actually know what anything is happening*
 
  • #16
In theory S. minor the the most 'primative' sarracenia species. And heliamphora could be a common ancestor to both.

Unfortunately, pollinating the flowers will just result in empty seedpods.
 
  • #17
lol, I could of sworn "genuses" was a word... hey, it sounds kind of dirty if you say it slowly a few times...

*genera, genera, genera* lol, I just increases my verbal skills.
 
  • #18
One thing to consider is that taxonomy and speciation are man-made distinctions. Yes, they have their criteria, but it isn't a "cut and dry" science. Hence the variety of opinions as to how many species there are, within a given, manmade genus. In my opinion, there are fewer species than there ought and I think some people mix up homology with analogy (similar structure vs. similar function).
 
  • #19
S. minor is primative? It is the only one to apply light portals.
 
Back
Top