Ultra rare drosera photos

[Tamlin Dawnstar]

I thought maybe some of you might like to see some very rare Drosera photos. As far as I know, these are the only photos currently on the web of Drosera ramentacea; there are 3 photos which come courtesty of Robert Gibson, and a single photo of Drosera cendeensis courtesy of Fernando Rivadavia. Please do not repost or use without prior permission. The photos may be viewed at my Yahoo page at:

http://f1.pg.photos.yahoo.com/tamlindd

(the rest of the photos are my own plants)

 

[JanW]

William,

you make me jealous! VERY nice plants.
Do you use natural oder artifical light?

Jan

 

[Tamlin Dawnstar]

Thank you for the compliment. My plants are grown under lights for the cold months and outdoors during the warmer months. I use a LOT of light: 8 growlight tubes. Plants are kept within 4 inches of the tubes.

 

[Greg Bourke]

Some good pics there and a few things I don't have. Can I send a bribe I've got a D. ramentacea pic on my yahoo page Just can't work out how to find it and can't work out how to get the pic on here. Modern technologololy is just too much for some of us.

 

[Darcie]

OMG OMG thats it thats my mystery dew
Drosera_hirtella_var_hirtella_051703_2
Granted they just all died

but still thats the plant!

 

[Tamlin Dawnstar]

Hi Greg!

I am unable to post any photos from my yahoo site either, so don't feel too dense about that! Bob Z. prefers not to link to yahoo sites since they tend to be ephremal, but if you want to get it onto his site I will be happy to post your photo with appropriate credits onto one of my sites. Alas, none of my sites allows for posting to the Forum! How about posting the addy to your yahoo group, we'd love to see your photos!

Does your D. ramentacea ever set seed <Drool>?

Darcie,

D. hirtella var hirtella is quite a rare species in cultivation, so your plant is not likely to be this species. There are other less rare Drosera species that are similar to D. hirtella var hirtella like D. brevifolia or possibly one of the many (apparently) introgressed forms in the D. capillaris complex.

 

[Darcie]

Okay well, they looked exactly like that plant so I would imagin that they were a commen look alike. Too bad they died (sunburned weekend, fungi took out, yes, I got the fungiside out after that).

 

[utricman]

Nice pics.  However, the plant that is pictured is not D. esterhuizenae.  That plant is not a compact rosette.  The plant you have pictured looks more like a burmanii or a sessilifolia (although from the picture I can't tell how big the plant is)....

Here is an image of D. esterhuizenae

This image is protected by copyright laws, email me for permission to use this image.  

Utircman

 

[efbiosis]

Tamlin andUtricman, very nice pics! There is nothing like seeing a well grown sundew in all its glory. Keep up the fine work and keep the free advice coming

 

[Tamlin Dawnstar]

Utricman,

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!

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.

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

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

 

[utricman]

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

 

[Tamlin Dawnstar]

Utricman,

Its a fine 2 cents worth! Add to the list D. admirabilis which certainly seems to warrant species segregation. I suppose Jan has some deeper insight into speciation, and the requirements for seggregation. I recall that D. nidiformis and D. dielsiana were long argued to also be synonomous despite the radical difference in their appearance, so I think that it is not by eye alone that these distinctions are made. Possibly by dart board, LOL?

Interesting comment regarding the possibility of hybridization between D. hilaris and D. cuneifolia. I have scant experience with either species, although I have just (once again) sown a reputed D. cuneifolia. My last attempt produced nothing more than D. spatulata, go figure!

Keep me in mind if you ever find a source for D. hilaris, this is a species I long to grow and study. I will look for the article by Robert on D. esterhuyseniae, I must have it somewhere.

I look forward to the floral photos when you can post them with eager anticipation!

 

[utricman]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tamlin Dawnstar @ Aug. 19 2003,11:09)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Its a fine 2 cents worth!  Add to the list D. admirabilis which certainly seems to warrant species segregation.  I suppose Jan has some deeper insight into speciation, and the requirements for seggregation.  I recall that D. nidiformis and D. dielsiana were long argued to also be synonomous despite the radical difference in their appearance, so I think that it is not by eye alone that these distinctions are made.  Possibly by dart board, LOL?[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Dart board... I like it. Oh well, maybe one day we will understand the mysteries of "correct" taxonomy...

Anyway, as promised see the image below and let me know what you think.

This image is copy right. Please email for permission to use this image.

 

[Tamlin Dawnstar]

That's a stunning photo, and you say your plants don't do this photo justice! Yes, I get the feeling of D. hilaris from the shape of the lamina, but the hairs on the lamina remind me of a form of D. natalensis ostensibly from Zimbabwe. It has the same ascending petioles. I do not see D. aliciae in it at all, but then again D. aliciae and D. natalensis by be just distal polar extremes of one population of compatible karyotypes. I continue to feel the concept of species is optimistic regarding the South African members of the genus. (I have counter arguments for the proponents of genetic analysis&#33

I am willing to wager the karyotype of this species is 2n=40 with all the implications of introgression this suggests. If you are a collector, this is a frustrating fact. I have considered adding the prefix aff. (e.g. Drosera aff. natalensis) as a prefix to most of my South African species, just to relieve the aggravation.

Still, I love them all, and I enjoy their varied beauty. Your plant is a wonderful example of the diversity of the region, and gives me yet another "species" to try to someday grow. Thanks again for sharing your photos. I look forward to seeing more photos from your fine collection.