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!

U.  nova-zealandiae

i have one that is about to bloom, the flower should open this weekend, and was asked if it was a seperate species or a locale or what? anyone know? a quick internet search said it was similar to U. dichotoma, but no real info.
 
U. dichotoma var. novae-zelandiae originates from New Zealand. It was originally considered to be a species in it's own right but has been relegated to the varietal status by Utric taxonomist Peter Taylor (as was U. monanthos).

Obviously it very closely resembles a typical dichotoma except that it generally has much shorter flowerscapes and flowers which are lighter in colour with different patterns of colouration.

I would be very interested in seeing a photo of the plant when it flowers.
 
well its open, i think. it didnt open like my other Utrics that i have flowered so far but i havent flowered dichtoma before either. ill take a pic today and ill prolly have it posted tomorrow if i can get a good pic with the digi cam. thanks for the info.
 
sorry guys and gals, the digi cam at work took a dump so no pics. pretty lil flower though, purples and yellow but it looks like it is only half open compared to my other Utrics but since it has been open for 3 or 4 days now that must be how its supposed to be. sorry for no pics.
 
If memory serves me Taylor classified all these guys as different species and it is later researchers that has decided to clump them. I'll check my copy tonight...
 
hmmmmmmmm i just checked BobZ's picture site(i really need to look at it more often) the flower on mine isnt quite right. ill take my 35mm home tonite and get a pic. i wonder if its just a malformed flower. it looks like this one but with out the "light purple skirt". mine is identical otherwise. its yellow where this one is yellow and dark purple where this one is dark purple its light purple "skirt" just isnt there. anyways here is the pic, im using a link since it is not my picture. i wish it would have sent up two stalks so i would have two flowers to go by instead of one. another thought...does this species/variety take awhile for the flower to fully open?

Utricularia novae-zelandiae photo
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Pyro @ Jan. 12 2005,7:55)]If memory serves me Taylor classified all these guys as different species and it is later researchers that has decided to clump them. I'll check my copy tonight...
The ICPS Database puts monanthos and novae-zelandiae as synonyms of dichotoma. Taylor's monograph (1989) lists monanthos, novae-zelandiae, and dichotoma as separate species, but states the plants are rather similar and, for example, discusses his difficulty on page 119:
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]I thus find myself unable, with the material to hand, to resolve this problem in a completely satisfactory manner and must leave it to subsequent investigations in Australia and New Zealand to produce a better solution.
 
i have a question then Bob. am i wrong to keep the plant labeled as U. novae-zelandiae? or should i change it to U. dichotoma var. novae-zelandiae? i THINK i would be more comfortable leaving it as U. novae-zelandiae (provided it is infact a malformed flower or such) given
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]I thus find myself unable, with the material to hand, to resolve this problem in a completely satisfactory manner and must leave it to subsequent investigations in Australia and New Zealand to produce a better solution.

ill do my best to get a pic up so i can get some opinions as to what it is.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (rattler_mt @ Jan. 12 2005,10:39)]i have a question then Bob. am i wrong to keep the plant labeled as U. novae-zelandiae? or should i change it to U. dichotoma var. novae-zelandiae?
Plant taxonomy is part art, part science. The splitters would tend to make every variation into a different species; the lumpers would combine these into a single species. Animal taxonomists tend to be gross lumpers compared to plant taxonomists. Consider the political and social ramifications of applying splitter plant taxonomy to humans.
smile_k_ani_32.gif


My tendency is to retain on my plant labels the original name that I received the plant. If that identity turns out to be incorrect, I add what I consider to be the correct name, knowing that my identity may itself turn out to be incorrect. Personally, I would continue to label the plant U. novae-zelandiae, if that is how you received it (and that identity is correct).
 
  • #10
You are definitely growing U. novae-zelandiae (or U. monanthos var. novae-zelandiae if you like). The very short inflorescence and the light colouration differentiate it from dichotoma. BTW, that isn't a malformed flower, it's probably as good as it's gonna get.

I thought that Taylor had lumped them- thanks for proving me wrong Bob. All the more reason to make a greater effort to get my hands on his monograph.
 
  • #11
i studied my lone lil flower last night and i am confident it is correctly labeled. the dang flower just refuses to open all the way up. all the correct parts are there. its a pretty lil flower. these lil pots of moss are about as good as orchids in there showy flowers even if they are pint sized.
 
  • #12
As I said in my previous post, your flower is completely opened and it is definitely U. novae-zelandiae- you don't believe me?. This is a very small flowered species.
 
  • #13
Sean, that pic is not mine. its a pic i found on BobZ's pic site. i stated that im my post but i guess i didnt make it clear enough, sorry.
 
  • #14
There is certainly no need to apologise, I am the one that should be doing that. You did make it very clear in your post that the photo was not yours. Don't know what I was thinking or reading. Very sorry about that.
 
Back
Top