hairy Nepenthes hamata or Nepenthes edwardsiana?

[nightsky]

That's a tough call. If they were the same price, I'd choose the red hairy Nepenthes hamata. Chien Lee's photo is the finest Nepenthes pic I've seen. But, the Nepenthes edwardsiana (eddie) is so much cheaper. However, I've never been that enthralled with Nepenthes edwardsiana. I like Nepenthes villosa much more. If I had the conditions, I'd put Nepenthes villosa right below red Nepenthes hamata for my most wanted.

 

[Soopaman]

Well, I just bought a Nepenthes hamata (red hairy) from Tony. His price was $25 cheaper than I had seen elsewhere, and he agreed to hold onto it for me until I get back from Venezuela.

If I had to choose, I'd probably still have to go with the N. hamata (red hairy), provided it continues to look like Chien Lee's photo. If it doesn't, I might be slightly disheartened, but I'll still have the Nepenthes I wanted since I entered the hobby, before I learned about Nepenthes edwardsiana (Eddy). It is, after maturing a bit, a pretty easy to grow plant and grows rather fast (from all I've heard.) I don't want to have to wait 5 years for Eddy to mature. The N. hamata should be ready in a couple years.

I like Nepenthes edwardsiana (Eddy), and it's on my list of Nepenthes to get in the future, I'd love to do some hybrdizing with it at some point. But as far as toothy pitchers go, I like the teeth on N. villosa more.

From another perspective, however, I have a sound appreciation for the uniqueness of the plant, in that it has what is likely a trait that would be an advantage to it evolutionarily via the trichromes (the hairs). They are likely able to help ward off insects that may be feeding on the pitchers.

 

[Exo]

Funny how everyone is buying a super expensive plant based on a single photo.......

 

[Soopaman]

Funny how everyone is buying a super expensive plant based on a single photo.......

If it's genetically identical, there is no reason that, given the right conditions, it shouldn't look just like the photo. Anyhow, I've looked at other photos besides Chien's, and while his photo is superb, other photographs of the clones sold in 2009 look promising.

 

[Exo]

If it's genetically identical, there is no reason that, given the right conditions, it shouldn't look just like the photo. Anyhow, I've looked at other photos besides Chien's, and while his photo is superb, other photographs of the clones sold in 2009 look promising.

It can't be genetically identical....TC plants are started using seeds...the one Chien took a pic of was in the wild I think...or at the very least a seperate seedgrown plant.

 

[Soopaman]

It can't be genetically identical....TC plants are started using seeds...the one Chien took a pic of was in the wild I think...or at the very least a seperate seedgrown plant.

If you start a tissue culture with seeds, what happens when you run out of seeds?

I believe a cutting was taken of the plant, and then cultured. Given the properties of the apical meristem and axillary buds, a plant could be grown out of either of those given the right conditions, unless there is something I don't know about.

In any event, I am going to do some research and try to get a definitive answer on exactly where they are getting he original clones from.

 

[Exo]

If you start a tissue culture with seeds, what happens when you run out of seeds?

I believe a cutting was taken of the plant, and then cultured. Given the properties of the apical meristem and axillary buds, a plant could be grown out of either of those given the right conditions, unless there is something I don't know about.

In any event, I am going to do some research and try to get a definitive answer on exactly where they are getting he original clones from.

You use hormones to make the seedling divide.....it's how most Nepenthes TC is done...you can get an infinite number of seedlings from a single seed....apical meristem culture with Nepenthes is still experimental..it does work, but with great difficulty.

 

[Soopaman]

You use hormones to make the seedling divide.....it's how most Nepenthes TC is done...you can get an infinite number of seedlings from a single seed....apical meristem culture with Nepenthes is still experimental..it does work, but with great difficulty.

Thanks Exo, that was actually a good answer

I am unfamiliar with the exact workings of tissue culture, but I do know a bit about plant morphology and physiology. I am hoping it is an exact clone of the plant, as I feel it would be deceptive if they advertised it as the N. hamata (Red Hairy) when it was originally bred with a typical to produce the seed for TC. As much of a respectable group BE is, I would not want to think they would do that.

Edit:
Is it actually possible that it was seed collected from two natural growing (red hairy) forms of Nepenthes hamata? Seeing as how there are different types of other Nepenthes that grow and reproduce amongst their population naturally, it doesn't seem out of the bounds to say that the seed could be from a male (red hairy) and a female (red hairy).

 

[Exo]

Thanks Exo, that was actually a good answer

I am unfamiliar with the exact workings of tissue culture, but I do know a bit about plant morphology and physiology. I am hoping it is an exact clone of the plant, as I feel it would be deceptive if they advertised it as the N. hamata (Red Hairy) when it was originally bred with a typical to produce the seed for TC. As much of a respectable group BE is, I would not want to think they would do that.

Edit:
Is it actually possible that it was seed collected from two natural growing (red hairy) forms of Nepenthes hamata? Seeing as how there are different types of other Nepenthes that grow and reproduce amongst their population naturally, it doesn't seem out of the bounds to say that the seed could be from a male (red hairy) and a female (red hairy).

I do believe that the red hairy is not a particular individual, but an actual variety...there is more than one, and I even think that long ago there were seedgrown plants that were released.

 

[dashman]

N. edwardsiana for sure. Been wanting it since I first saw it over 10 years ago. To me no other Nepenthes looks as prehistoric.

Which is funny because it is fairly new...

"Mount Kinabalu was only formed around 1 million years ago and during the last ice age, around 20,000 to 10,000 years ago, it had an ice cap on its summit. As such, it appears that N. edwardsiana is a relatively recent species in evolutionary terms"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nepenthes_edwardsiana

 

[Soopaman]

Which is funny because it is fairly new...

"Mount Kinabalu was only formed around 1 million years ago and during the last ice age, around 20,000 to 10,000 years ago, it had an ice cap on its summit. As such, it appears that N. edwardsiana is a relatively recent species in evolutionary terms"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nepenthes_edwardsiana

I get the feeling the toothed peristome of the toothy Nepenthes is a later evolutionary advancement due to other organisms fishing the trapped insects and other victims from the pitchers to eat for themselves. The trapping mechanisms would have developed, then other organisms start taking from the pitchers, and the pitchers become more toothy as a result.

 

[dashman]

LOL. I think you may be onto something. That is one Monkey Cup that most monkies s wouldn't dare try to steal from more than once.

 

[Soopaman]

LOL. I think you may be onto something. That is one Monkey Cup that most monkey's wouldn't dare try to steal from.

Without observing the natural habitat, I can't really see any other reason for it.

However, I do find it curious that the toothed Nepenthes (aside from Nepenthes bicalcarata, which is fanged), only occur in high elevations. The four major toothed, Nepenthes hamata, Nepenthes edwardsiana, Nepenthes villosa, and Nepenthes macrophylla are all in very high elevations (especially Nepenthes villosa, which to me, has the most pronounced toothed peristome). I'd like the chance to investigate the circumstances surrounding this development.

 

[dashman]

Unless you have a time machine, it would probably be a futile attempt. Observing modern day conditions to base an opinion on is to assume nothing has changed.

 

[Soopaman]

Unless you have a time machine, it would probably be a futile attempt. Observing modern day conditions to base an opinion on is to assume nothing has changed.

Evolution is always in action.

But what I meant was I don't know what other organisms are in the environment that these Nepenthes grow in that may have take advantage of opportunities offered by food sitting around in a cup, I assume it isn't just monkeys.

 

[swords]

Quote:
<table border="0" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="0" width="100%"><tbody><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset"> Originally Posted by swords
N. edwardsiana for sure. Been wanting it since I first saw it over 10 years ago. To me no other Nepenthes looks as prehistoric.
</td></tr></tbody></table>
Which is funny because it is fairly new...

Merely the impression I get looking at the plant, *******!

Why would anyone pay $75+ for a N. hamata when they're $30 for small plants? I would only pay more for it on a cutting that I didn't have to wait for it to grow up.

 

[dsrtfox1942]

Think of it this way though. If a monkey sticks it's hand into a pitcher to fish out a snack, only to be caught by sharp inward facing teeth, the monkey will surely rip off, at the minimum, the pitcher and possibly destroy the whole plant essentially committing suicide. So, I believe this is not the reason for these teeth. Besides, if I believed in evolution, wouldn't nearly all of the Nepenthes have evolved this way, since monkeys are prevalent in nearly all tropical locations where these plants grow? Yet today we only have 4 very well known toothy species, Nepenthes hamata, Nepenthes edwardsiana, Nepenthes macrophylla and Nepenthes villosa. I do not wish to start a discussion on evolution, this is simply my thought. Look at Nepenthes lowii upper pitcher shape and nectar. Surly there must be a direct environmental cause for these pitchers to have teeth, just as Nepenthes lowii has these characteristics, but I do not think it is for defense, at least not from monkeys.

---------- Post added at 01:29 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:27 AM ----------

Merely the impression I get looking at the plant, *******!

Why would anyone pay $75+ for a N. hamata when they're $30 for small plants? I would only pay more for it on a cutting that I didn't have to wait for it to grow up.

I'd like to see your source for $30 Nepenthes hamata ......

I shopped and shopped and waited, and finally just ordered from AW. With shipping and exchange rate it came out to $70. This was the cheapest I have found in recent times.

 

[swords]

Eh, I always forget it's in Euros! LOL

I've never ordered just one from overseas, make it worth it and order a boxful Don't know if he still gives free shipping on orders of 250 EUROS or more but I will be finding out soon enough.

 

[dashman]

@swords. Sorry. I wasn't trying to tick you off. I read your reply and something sparked in my mind that recalled that I had read somewhere that Nepenthes edwardsiana was thought to be a relatively new species. Low and behold, I found the excerpt on wikipedia. But to tell you the truth, my first impression of N. edwardsiana was also that of a primordial example of Nepenthes.

 

[swords]

LOL It's not a big deal - that's why I put the rolling smiley and wrote my observation in E-prime "to me it looks to be the most prehistoric." It's merely my personal perception when looking at that plant that my mind relates big things (the big teeth and pitchers) to prehistoric times when reptiles, bugs and other things I tend to think of as bigger than they are nowadays.