South African Droserae

Vic Brown · Jun 23, 2003

I might be pursuaded that this plant is a form of D. cuneifolia, but it is certainly very different from the type. I am quite familiar with the D. cuneifolia in the collection of Alastair Culham at Reading University (an academic who's interests include Drosera systematics, as well as a keen CP collector, so hopefully his plants are correctly I.D.ed), these plants are much larger when mature, over an inch in diameter and certainly bigger than the flowers. The plants in my photos are very small, the flower in the photo was much bigger than the rosette from which it grew.

Vic

utricman · Jun 23, 2003

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tony Paroubek @ Sep. 04 2002,02:51)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I have coccicaulis..

At least that is what it is called. From Triffid Park. I am probably one of the worst at IDing Drosera but it seems to fit the description. My understanding is that there is question that it is even a valid species by some people..
Anyway, here is a picture of the coccicaulis

I also have trinervia, glabripes.. jacoby (I think)
Many of these I am trying for the first time so have alot to learn.
Tony[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

Tony,
Your "D. coccicaulis" is D. venusta. Back in the late 80s, when this plant first surfaced it was circulated as D. coccicaulis (though the species itself was not yet described) and most plants with this name out there today originated from this stock. D. venusta is very variable therefore anything that looks like it probably is. I am not aware that D. coccicaulis actually entered cultivation.

Utricman

CP2k · Jun 23, 2003

Hi Utricman,

Check the second page of this topic. There is a post by Stefan that should explain the origins of "coccicaulis".

utricman · Jun 23, 2003

CP2K,
My point remains: D. coccicaulis is D. venusta.

Thanks for pointing out how D. coccicaulis (=> D. venusta) entered cultivation with a wrong name.

Tamlin Dawnstar · Jun 23, 2003

Dr. Schlauer's database lists D. venusta as synonomous with D. natalensis. I am inclined to accept this opinion as well. Variation is too great within the complex to allow segregation for every variation at species level.

So, D. coccicaulis = D. venusta = D. natalensis. Nice and simple!

Tamlin Dawnstar · Jun 24, 2003

Vic,

I have had this reply from Robert:

"The 2 images sure do look like D. admirabilis, particularly from the styles that flare at the apex into wedge-shaped stigmatic lobes. The narrowly wedge shaped leaves also match D. admirabilis. I am aware of this species from 2 locations: Hermanus and Bains Kloof, the latter in close proximity to D. regia. Paul Debbert implies the species also occurs in the Palmiet River Valley, west of Hermanus. Given these locations are fairly widely spaced it appears reasonable to assume this species may be locally common over a large part of the western Cape. And, if so, may also exhibit more variation than is currently in the literature."

I would like to take this opportunity to thank Robert for his considerate reply.

Vic Brown · Jun 25, 2003

Thanks for chasing that one up for me Tamlin, it is much appreciated, thank Robert from me when next you talk. I have a lot of respect for **** Jones who grew this plant and I had certainly seen nothing like it when I cast eyes on it last week, hence, I took the time to photograph it.

I am currently growing seed, labelled as D. admirabilis, if they don't grow into something resembling ****'s plants, then they will go straight to the compost heap! I know who I shall be asking for seeds next year too.

I suppose all that remains is to convince a certain taxonomist that D. admirabilis exists and is different from D. cuneifolia.

Given Jan's recent responses on the Listserve, it maybe difficult to persuade him to find the time to visit this forum, let alone change his opinion.

Cheers

Vic

Tamlin Dawnstar · Jun 26, 2003

Vic,

Well, Dr. Schlauer if quite a busy man so I am hardly surprised at this. This being said, I will continue to give my "best guesses" on ID questions.

Good luck with obtaining and growing this plant, which certainly seems in all regards a suitable candidate for species rank.

noah · Jun 26, 2003

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> This being said, I will continue to give my "best guesses" on ID questions.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

Oh Good!

Well, I do have one plant that I have questions about...

This plant is from seed I originally received as d. madagascariensis. I planted some, donating the rest of the seed to the LACPS seedbank. Ivan Snyder (the seedbank manager) said the seed looked to him like sp. rhodesia (Also madagascariensis 'rhodesia'?). Forbes ended up with the seed (hi Forbes&#33

and grew it to maturity. The resulting plant looks to be some kind of a nidiformis hybrid:

What do you think? (this includes anyone out there with any educated opinions

)

thanks,

-noah

CP2k · Jun 26, 2003

Looks like nidiformis to me. I have also received seeds of "D.madagascariensis" that turned out to be nidiformis. Seems to be a commonly misidentified plant.

Tamlin Dawnstar · Jun 27, 2003

Ahhhh, the problem again rears it's ugly head. I have spent MUCH time tracing this down.

The plant in question is D. nidiformis, known also as D. "sp. Mageliesburg". It was marketed for close to a decade as D. magagascariensis by various nurseries all over the world and has turned up in nearly every seedbank exant. Several nurserymen wrote to me admitting the error when I made inquiry on the listserve.

At this stage of the exponential spread, all that can be done is to address this topic over and over in as many public forums as possible. The problem will never go away.

The true D. madagascariensis is a caulescent (stem forming) species. If you have D. "sp. Botswana" you have D. madagascariensis according to Dr. Vitor Olivera de Miranda who did analysis of the ribosomal DNA. (Pers. Comm.)

This form of D. nidiformis stays green in strong light, and is over all larger than the form of D. nidiformis with more red pigment. The latter has been distributed by the ICPS seed bank.

There is no evidence that this is a hybrid, per se, but if you have followed this thread, you have some idea of the intricate problems regarding S.A. species in general.

This is a beautiful photo of the plant Noah. Well done!

Forbes · Jun 30, 2003

Noah,

Nice photos! The plant looks at least twice as good as it did last Saturday. Must be the water…

Tamlin,

Thanks for cutting through some of the haze that has been gathering around this plant – I often have a hard time _giving_ them away at LACPS meetings.

I’ve found Noah’s plants to be about half the size of the aforementioned ICPS material, but otherwise the same. I’ve grown multiple plants (waaaay too many) to maturity from each source under identical conditions, and haven’t noticed any difference in coloration.

I collected seed from D. madagascariensis ‘Botswana’ a few days ago, BTW.

Tamlin Dawnstar · Jun 30, 2003

Hi Forbes,

Welcome to the forums. Regarding the 2 forms of nidiformis....I have noticed a distinctly different coloration under indentical conditions. I grow my plants in full sun out doors, maybe this accounts for it. I can tell them apart at a glance, despite the coloration differences. The plants from the ICPS seedbank all hold their lamina more erect, in effect the rosette is smaller in diameter. I am sure that there is individual variation, but generally I can see a real difference.

Congratulations on flowering your plants of D. madagascariensis, by most accounts this is a fairly rare event!

If you are overburdened with plants, I am sure Forum members would love these for the price of postage, and they might bring you some interesting trades on the trading forum ;-)

Forbes · Jul 1, 2003

Hi Tamlin,

Thanks. I am honored to take part in the festivities.

I have also found the ICPS material to grow by a more erect pattern, but still have dimensions significantly larger then the mock madagascariensis, both in rosette diameter and overall leaf size. Kind of like the difference between D. petiolaris and D. dilatatopetiolaris (to compare apples to kumquats

. I’ll have to try both plants in full sun; they have been growing a few inches from a shop light.

Nearly all of the ‘Noah’s madagascariensis’

plants have been distributed, but I will be disposing of some other plants and seeds here in the near future for the price of shipping.

Tamlin Dawnstar · Jul 1, 2003

I would be very interested in a seed sample to record and place in the herbarium files, should that event happen.

Greg Bourke · Jul 1, 2003

G'day all,

I've just joined and have only had a chance to skim through the previous postings. Sorry for that.

I grow D. admirabilis, coccicaulis, esterhuyseniae, sp. malwai, sp. South Africa, burkeana, madagascariensis, cuneifolia, galabripes, trinervia (white flowered), pauciflora, dielsiana (white and pink forms), natalensis, slackii, aliciae, nidiformis, ramentacea, cistiflora (red, white, violet, yellow flowered forms), D. glabripes x aliciae (this is the one that Triffid Park sells as glabripes) and a buch of hybrids.

I had jacoby but discarded it as I was unsure of it's ID (silly)

I'd be interested in trading any species especially with location details. Even common species.

Thanks

Greg Bourke · Jul 2, 2003

I believe D. admirabilis has been raised to species status.

D. coccicaulis has significant differences from venusta to be kept separate. Whether this requires species status or not I'm not sure but don't change your labels!

I also have two distinct forms of D. nidiformis. One is smaller. one os redder and the flower size and colour is different.

Greg

Tamlin Dawnstar · Jul 2, 2003

Hi Greg,

Wooo Hooo!!!! A resounding welcome to you and my personal thanks for joining the forum! I need all the help I can get on this topic, and your experience will be a Godsend to us all.

Do you happen to know the publication that raises D. admirabilis to species status, or can you provide any insight as to when this happened? It is still listed as a synonym for D. cuneifolia in the CP Database, or was the last I looked.

Greg Bourke · Jul 4, 2003

I'll do a bit of searching on the D. admirabilis. My memory doesn't serve me too well on this.

I had a look at some of my hybrids today, D. admirabilis x capensis red is growing slow but promises to be a good looking plant. D. madagascariensis x deilsiana is fast growing and there appear to be a few good looking clones. Still too early to get real excited but.......

Greg

CP2k · Jul 4, 2003

Hi Greg,

Check the 13th and 19th post of the second page of this thread. Stefan mentions that D.coccicaulis=venusta and explains his reasoning.

Thanks for clearing up the confusion with D.glabripes. A couple of nursuries in the US have sold D."glabripes" from Triffid Parks, which you mention is D.glabripes x aliciae. I have always suspected that the glabripes in my collection is a hybrid as the lamina is very wide and does that match the photo of Martin's glabripes(posted on the 14th post of the second page of this thread). I have seen some "glabripe" photos on the webpages of US growers and none look like the real thing.