Tamlin,
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>
Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Thank you very much for your opinion. Seed came from Silverhill seed, collected in South Africa. As I have had no prior experience with this species I really can't say if it is or it isn't. Any chance of a top view of this plant so I can see the lamina more clearly? From the side it appears to be the form sold by Best CP, and I have noted the difference between this and my plants!
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
This makes it even more interesting. I have a slide of a top view of my plants and will try to scan it tonight. However, I must admit that none of the slides does this little plant justice!
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>
Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">D. "esterhuyseniae" is a bogus species, so to some extent, I suppose it is what anyone claims it to be. Mine is not thriving, but it certainly is not either D. burmannii or D. sessilifolia. I have felt that it may have some involvement with D. cuneifolia. possibly crossed with D. aliciae.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
While some authorities claim that the name D. esterhuizenae is a bogus name, I think the plant itself could very well be genetically separate from other described plants. I must state though that this is based on my own plants since it is very different. I would say my plant is intermediate between D. hilaris and a D. cuneifolia type.
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>
Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Doing a web search to reach a "consensus" opinion of what others are growing, I find this page showing 2 types of this being grown by Japanese growers. The lowermost photos are identical to my plants.
http://www-cp.stech.co.jp/cp/dro/D-esterhuysenae_e.html
and here is one indeterminate between the two above:
http://homepage2.nifty.com/k_osada/D_esterhuysnae.htm
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
The upper most plants seem identical to the ones that I grow.
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>
Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Once the plant matures a little, I will ask Robert Gibson for his opinion as he has seen this "species" in habitat in South Africa.
I find it hard to accept the synonymity with D. aliciae (as per Dr. Schlauer), but I have not had the chance to observe the flowers which may be more diagnostic. The seed appears very similar to D. natalensis/aliciae. Do you have any photos of the flowers from your plant?
Thanks again for taking the time to share this photo!
If you notice any other "problems" with any of my photos, I would appreciate your input
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
A few years ago there was a CPN article (I think authored by Robert Gibson) that referenced D. esterhuizenae with a photo. This one too looked like the plant that I grow. Please post his opinion, I would be interested.
I have not yet had the pleasure of seeing this plant in flower, but as soon as I have a flower, I will post.
As to your comment about synonymity, I agree. If you squash this plant and mount it on a herbarium sheet and study that, could very well end up with an opinion that this plant should be lumped into the D. natalensis/aliciae family. HOWEVER, in growing this plant and seeing it alive, I have come to the conclusion that this plant should be split into its own taxon. Just my 2c.
Utricman