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!

Awesome hibrid idea!

  • #21
[b said:
Quote[/b] (agustinfranco @ Nov. 06 2004,2:39)]Individuals from different species can't interbreed. Then why this happens with Nepenthes. Are we dealing with species or subspecies? Maybe they all belong to one Genus Nepenthes and one species. Actually two or three since nobody has been able to hybridize N. pervillei and N. viellardii.
You lost me on that one Gus. I can't find anywhere in the deffinition of species that says this. The deffinition as I know it simply states "(biology) taxonomic group whose members can interbreed." This doesn't imply that different species can't interbreed.

So by this deffinition N. pervillei and viellardii fit the Nepenthes genus as their flower structure, plant structure, growth habits, morphology etc fall within the confines of the rest of the members in the genus. Also by this deffinition you could theoretically group all the Nepenthes that can interbreed into a single species with perhaps subspecies designations. The point is that in the end when I say N. macrophylla or N. edwardsiana subsp. macrophylla you instantly know exactly what plant I am talking about. This is what the taxonimists goals are. How they break up the big conglomerate of Nepenthes into smaller bits so we can all communicate with each other is always open to debate.

Tony

PS.. I would like someone to make me a N. edwardsiana x hamata pls
smile_n_32.gif
 
  • #22
[b said:
Quote[/b] (agustinfranco @ Nov. 06 2004,1:39)]Hi all;

Let's go back to the main point of the discussion. The fact that one sees more hybrids in TC than they occurred in the wild, my guess is that it has been discussed in a thread a couple of weeks ago. Competitive environment occurs in the wild while a TC flask  is a free for all to grow. It is very clear from Rob's bicalcarata clones that the female bicalcarata flower takes up a lot of pollen and from different sources. Why only few of these grow in the wild while, all of them grow in TC?. Of course environmental selective pressure would allow only those that adapt to the environment very quickly as opposed to those which they'd have a hard time to grow and develop in such a competitive environment.

those hybrids which don't normally make it to the stage of plantlets will perish, but they will be made again next year and the next until these find a way to overcome the obstacles and become dominant. When and how?, well it'd depend on the environmental circumstances while germinating.

Regarding the species found in Australia: Mirabilis and Mirabilis var rowanae or N. rowanae as some growers call it, still is debatable. I was originally convinced that N. rowanae was a true species, but the fact that there is a N. Viking from Thailand with similar if not almost identical characteristics of Rowanae around and some of its variants just as it occurs with Rowanane would make anybody think twice about these being in fact new species rather than two mirabilis hybrids!

Rowanae and Viking could just be complex hybrids that are evolving to species. Now to make things more interesting, i would like to bring up the fact that the description of species

a group of organisms that have a unique set of characteristics (like body shape and behavior) that distinguishes them from other organisms. If they reproduce, individuals within the same species can produce fertile offspring.

Individuals from different species can't interbreed. Then why this happens with Nepenthes. Are we dealing with species or subspecies? Maybe they all belong to one Genus Nepenthes and one species. Actually two or three since nobody has been able to hybridize N. pervillei and N. viellardii.

Gus
Lol. I think we need to re-consider our defination of a species! I meem there are so many genus that have species that are cross fertile i.e.Nepenthes(excluding pervelii(Sp?)),Sarracenia,many Pingiculia,and others. Under the current definition all these would be the same species,but look at a Lowii and a hamata for instance very different indeed!
 
  • #23
Tony I guess it all depends on what biolagy course you took Lol. Hmmm. edwardsiana x hamata sounds nice....but edwardsiana is so rare in cultivation that it would be rather hard to make this cross. I think all people crossing Neps should record the data of what traits seem to be dominant when crossed with the particular specie. And then we could make a data base for this and that would help perspective hybridizers chose what species pollen to use. Of course this is just my views....
 
  • #24
Hi all:

Tony: I am sorry i did not describe the whole concept fully. Species are members of a group of individuals that can interbreed.  I guess we need to go one step up and describe what a genus is:

Genus
A more exact taxonomic classification than the family taxon. Organisms sharing the same genus share many similarities but cannot produce fertiles offspring if not reproducing with a member of the same species.

This is from an Online biology dictionary.

If we follow this concept clearly: N. lowii must not hybridize with N. ventricosa, N. truncata, and many other neps, because even though the all belong to the Genus Nepenthes, they both belong to what we call different species. Strangely enough we all know that in fact, Lowii produces hybrids with many other neps. I guess Geoff must agree with me on this one.

Following this hypothetical statement on Pervillei, viellardii, and the 120 or more neps around the world, we would have to conclude that even though they all belong to the genus Nepenthes, we may in fact have only three species.

Gus
 
  • #25
BTW:

What a mess i got myself into, but as others have mentioned previously, i am enjoying this very much.

I guess i am masochistic.

Gus
 
  • #26
Well Gus You got me again.. I have looked at multiple online deffinitions for genus as well as a couple in my old text books. I can't find one that says members of the same genus produce infertile offspring or that they can not interbreed. Most simply just state a taxonomic group of one or more species. Some go further and state that the species within a genus can interbreed but make no reference to infertile or fertile offspring.

Here is just one of the links I looked at Genus deffinitions

Tony
 
  • #27
Tony, you might have to wait a while for edwardsiana x hamata. Macrophylla x hamata may well be produced very soon, as someone I know has a macrophylla of flowering size (it just has to come up with the goods), and we have both male and female hamata. Timing will always be an issue though *sigh*
 
  • #29
Well that does indeed confirm what your saying. However as I said earlier I read many deffinitions which say just the opposite. Seems to confirm there are varying deffinitions and exactly what constitutes a species is open to debate. Particularly in the plant world you have case after case of not only intrageneric hybrids but intergeneric hybrids that get very complex. I don't think you can apply the deffinition that they can't interbreed if they are not the same species when your dealing with plant life. Ability to breed (or not) and to produce either fertile or infertile offspring is just one tiny aspect to help differentiate between different species. Clearly in the case of many plants it is not a very good one either since if were applied rigorously you would end up with a genus with a single species and hundreds of subspecies. It isn't difficult to to look at all the different Nepenthes and see how they are all similiar in the more general ways but clearly different when you get down to smaller details. Calling them the same species because they are still able to breed with each other and hence conflict with the one deffinition you found, goes against all the other differentiating features used by taxonomists.

Tony
 
  • #30
Tony:

Thanks for your reply. Going back the original discussion:
Yes, you are right. Nobody can't go and remake hundreds of years of taxonomy for the reasons you cited. The problem is that taxonomy relies too much on physical characteristics that one can mistakenly be classifying a plant as species, when it fact it is a complex hybrid that resembles such species. It has happened in the nep world with N. ramispina hybrids being labelled N. gracillima or clipeata hybrids being labelled pure clipeatas.

It is time for genetic analysis to take over; otherwise confusion will eventually take over and dominate plant taxonomy for many years to come.

Gus
 
  • #32
I think genetic analysis could be a useful tool. Especially when a really oddball plant comes along and doesn't fit any of the current known species or hybrids exactly. I am not a geneticist but wouldn't you need reference data on all the species and possibly natural hybrids too? The problem with that is the cost and time involved to acquire the information. And the problem of knowing if you have the pure species when your collecting that data in the first place. Your also relying on older nongenetic analysis methods to make the determination if you have the described species or not so right off the bat there is room for error and your reference data may be flawed. So nothing is perfect. Considering taxonomy has been around for 150yrs without genetic analysis I don't think confusion will take over. Quite on the contrary, since the start of Nepenthes species classifications it has gotten less confusing and many initial mistakes have long since been corrected.

I agree about the problem of some hybrids labelled as species. Particularly when it is a hybrid that has a single different species in it's distant past followed by multiple crosses back to the dominant parent. That's why it is so important to have very specific and accurate descriptions.

Tony
 
  • #33
Thanks for your reply.

I would like to make a comment on your previous thread regarding plant species interbreeding, which according to botanists, is possible. I was wondering whether the original classification of plants were performed according to the general trend that applies to non-plant life forms.

As far as i know, species in general can't interbreed. If they do, as it happens with donkeys and horses to produce infertile mules and a couple of other exceptions, why then it has to be different with plants?. Is it possible that botanists never interacted with zoologists hundreds of years ago?

It sounds like plant science itself developed very much independently from the other sciences, because it follows different rules when it comes to the denomination of species and who know how many other differences we'll find.

Gus
 
  • #34
I don't really know Gus but I agree the deffinitions are different and interbreed/intrabreeding in animals is very uncommon while in the plant kingdom it is very much more common. But since this does seem to be an issue in the plant kingdom, I think that it would rule it out as a good taxonomic factor when trying to classify organism at the genus and species level. It doesn't help much to differentiate between different plants because so many have the ability to inter/intrabreed.
Tony
 
  • #35
Lol. Guinea fowl and Chickens(wich are in seperate FAMILYS) will interbreed! Although the young are sterile they are still strong! I hope that our 2 guinea hens lay eggs soon and crossed with our roosters so we can get guinens:)
 
  • #36
That is a crime against nature. Actually, it would be pretty cool if you could interbreed, like a plant and and animal. Like a Bear with a Venus Flytrap.

This isn't exactly what i meant when i started this topic though.
 
  • #37
You see Nepenthes master: even topics evolve

Gus
 
  • #39
Well as Gus said you cannot measure it with a ruler but I can definately assume that there is a majority of undiscovered habitats and areas where Nepenthes hybrids dwell. Even so they maybe overlooked apart from the obvious.
The point that gus made is a very interesting one. Although the taxonomy is kept quite simple considering the amount of information there is. I would have thought individuals from a different genus cannot interbeed however if the genus is the same then the species can hybridise. Which therefore N.pervelli is an exception and should be classed in an order of its own.

C
 
  • #40
Why is Pervelli so different?
I didn't know that different genuses could hibridize, although i have wondered what would happen if you crossed a sundew with a Nepenthes. So then you have a climbing plant, and the vine grows like a Nepenthes, turns up like a Nepenthes, and folds in to two halfs revealing sundew tentacles. Hey, that would be pretty cool. If someone would do that, please tell me what the species are and mail one to me.
biggrin.gif
 
Back
Top