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!

D. binata vs. D. dichotoma?

G

Gatewaysysop

Guest
Hello all.

Quick question here. I've seen a few places selling what they call D. Binata and then also selling D. Dichotoma. They are billed as different plants, but the D. Dichotoma is not billed as either red, giant or anything else.

I've consulted a couple of the CP books that I have, including Slack's, but I'm still a bit confused here. Should I interpret this as being a D. Dichotoma 'typical' and not the particular giant or red varieties?

The reason I am asking is that I already have a handful of various forked sundews, but none of them are billed as ordinary dichotoma. I have the Dichotoma giant and red forms, Slack's hybrid 'Marston Dragon' clone, the multifida extrema, etc. What I don't have is just plain old Dichotoma.

Does anyone have this non-giant, non-red, non-small dichotoma to contrast with any of the others I've mentioned? If so, can you describe the differences? I'm just wondering if its worth plunking down a few dollars to add to the collection or if I'm potentially obtaining a mislabled clone of something I already have.

Thanks in advance for any info everyone!
 
Wow. Nothing? Maybe I'm not the only person confused then? :scratch:
 
Unless it's noted otherwise, you should assume it to be typical.
 
The D. binata complex is just that. Complex. There have been many differently described varieties. Some that were prized then, are little known now. I have one of the little known, and am happy with it. Genetic research may be the only way to sort it all out. At present, I am not sure if anything like that is happening anywhere. It would be cool if someone was.
 
Status of Drosera binata complex

Like Bugweed said, Drosera binata is a complex of plants. Attempts have been made to seperately name the various forms. For some reason there is presently only one valid name for the entire complex, no matter how different they appear, that is Drosera binata - though opinions may vary. Again, as Bugweed said, it would be nice if, some day soon, a botanist would take interest in this species and give a go at straightening it out. An exception to the naming confusion are the two registered cultivars in this complex, Drosera 'Giant' and Drosera 'Marston Dragon', validly registered cultivars.

Some people are still using the following additional names, though officially they are not valid:
(Can be seen at CP Database for Drosera binata)

Drosera binata var. dichotoma
Drosera binata var. multifida
Drosera binata var. multifida f. extrema

Of course, all the wonderful variety seen in this species and others can be documented using the cultivar regisitration system. Free to everyone, and an internationally created tool to assist those of us who grow these plants to better communicate about them and to be more certain of those which we grow. Link to cultivar registration.

BTW, Gatewaysysop --- Glendale, "Where"?
 
Last edited:
The Drosera binata group was being studied by Robert Gibson, but he gave up (postponed his studies) after he realised that separating the species into distinct groups was virtually impossible. The main problem is that it is incredibly difficult to find distinct boundaries to separate one variety from another. There is so much variety of the species, even within populations that there are alot of crossovers where one plant matches a particular group in one aspect but differs in another. As Joseph has said, there are no recognised varieties of this species, the only official name is D. binata.

To look at this in a very generalistic way, the species possibly could be broken into two-

The first would contain the plants currently included under the "T- forms" and "multifidas". These plants are generally red in colour and occur down the east coast of Australia, to WA and over in NZ.

The second group would contain what is currently grouped in the "dichotoma" group. These are a pale green colour and do not necessarily only have the 4 points as is usually associated with them. These are generally more robust plants and are concentrated around the centre of NSW around Sydney with a few disjunct populations.

Problem is that there are intergrades that effectively cannot be placed in either group.

An example is a population of plants that I found in Victoria, south-eastern Australia last spring. The populations were dominated by the typical "T-form" plants but also present were paler green "dichotoma" coloured plants which were also "T-form". These green plants were smaller and less robust than the red typical plants. If is difficult to know whether to group them with the "D. binata" or "D. dichotoma" types.

Anybody understand that?
 
So it would appear that colour, not leaf structure, is the approach taken to classify them? Taxonomy is such a nightmare!

Would the best way to preserve leaf characteristics be to propogate by leaf cuttings, as opposed to seeds?

Why are my so-called D. (Multifida Extrema x Marston Dragon) significantly harder to propogate by leaf cuttings, relative to plain, straightup binata?

Also, why aren't they producing more points, while the plain old binata has 3 or 4 points on occasion?
 
Sounds like we should call them "thing 1 & thing 2"

Are you red or are you green ?
How many forks in the leaf have I seen ?
2 for binata
the others could be 16 !

I will not tag them with a red or a green
and I will not count the forks I have seen !
I really do not care you see
since they all are simply marvelous to me !

Sorry the kids are kinda getting to me :-D
 
Chris... that was like way cool! "

...and the wheels of the bus go round and round...."
 
  • #10
Thanks everyone for the great responses. This actually does really help quite a bit and I appreciate it! :hail:
 
  • #11
So it would appear that colour, not leaf structure, is the approach taken to classify them? Taxonomy is such a nightmare!

Would the best way to preserve leaf characteristics be to propogate by leaf cuttings, as opposed to seeds?

Why are my so-called D. (Multifida Extrema x Marston Dragon) significantly harder to propogate by leaf cuttings, relative to plain, straightup binata?

Also, why aren't they producing more points, while the plain old binata has 3 or 4 points on occasion?
However, they haven't been classified, or named, at all, other than to all be lumped under the same name: Drosera binata. With two exceptions, the registered cultivars that were derived from this species.

Certainly, cloning techniques are more likely to preserve plants of the same genotype, which will, then be more likely to, in similar environmental conditions, display a similar phenotype.

When using the "floating in water" technique, I've noticed absolutely no difference in propagating the different types of this species from leaf cuttings and even chopped flower stalks and buds. I've even had a few that were self-pollinating and self-fertile that even became a bit weedy like Drosera capensis can. At least Drosera binata seedlings/plants, like Drosera capensis can easily be discerned, from most all other Drosera, keeping them from creating identification issues.

Lack of "points", most likely environmental issues. Full sunlight, or near equivalent, moderate humidity - 60% or better, good water and lots of it.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top