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!

Fang

  • Thread starter Tim
  • Start date
  • Tags
    fang
I saw a Fang the other day, and I couldn't believe such a thing existed. I ordered one today, and wonder if anyone else is growing it?
 
Hey Tim

Is this a Nepenthes hybrid?? Or did you mistakenly put this in the Nep forum as Fang rings a bell as a VFT cultivar.
 
Yes, it was a mistake. Perhaps a mod will transfer it. The traps were huge in a way to almost look artificial.
 
Thought it was some new bical hybrid.

Moved
smile.gif


Cheers, Troy.
 
Wow Tim, Fang? Can you PM me on where you ordered it from? Please?
biggrin.gif


Mike
smile.gif
 
I'd like to know that, too, please!

Thanks!
 
What's a fang? Can anybody post a picture of it?
 
Need more information....*drool
 
  • #10
Yah, but their isn't any scail or info on the picture pages. I've been wondering for a while what makes them distinctive if anything beyond the extrended red pygment.
 
  • #11
Those pictures are of young specimens. The one I saw had traps about twice that size. I'll try to get a picture this Saturday, the owner of the greenhouse owes me a favor, and I'm sure he wont mind. It the same guy who had that 18 inch diameter D. binata which I posted some time ago.
 
  • #12
As far as I can tell "Fang" and other such names as "All Green", "All Red", Atlanta", "Bart Simpson", etc are not validly described and published cultivar names. To be sure, a bunch of folks are growing, selling, and trading plants with these names and have posted photos of them on web pages. Without a published description, I wonder how consistent the various plants named, for example, "All Red" are.

In another thread, there was a discussion about 'Red Dragon' seedlings. I, myself, have grown 'Red Dragon' selfed seedlings and can verify that the offspring can be quite variable and not consistent with the parent -- and should not be called 'Red Dragon', unless they conform to the published description. The seed and plants could be called 'Red Dragon' x 'Red Dragon', which gives the correct warnings that they may be variable.
 
  • #13
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (BobZ @ April 16 2003,08:45)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">As far as I can tell "Fang" and other such names as "All Green", "All Red", Atlanta", "Bart Simpson", etc are not validly described and published cultivar names. To be sure, a bunch of folks are growing, selling, and trading plants with these names and have posted photos of them on web pages. Without a published description, I wonder how consistent the various plants named, for example, "All Red" are.

In another thread, there was a discussion about 'Red Dragon' seedlings. I, myself, have grown 'Red Dragon' selfed seedlings and can verify that the offspring can be quite variable and not consistent with the parent -- and should not be called 'Red Dragon', unless they conform to the published description. The seed and plants could be called 'Red Dragon' x 'Red Dragon', which gives the correct warnings that they may be variable.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Yes, it is hard to tell what is what when none have a published discription.

A note on red dragons: They should breed true, but like any breed, not all will be 'show' quality. I also suspect a large number of red dragons are no longer pure bred as people prefer to clone now (aka their are probubly plenty of red dragon look alike hybreds sold under the name). Now, I don't know if the published info on this varient is a bunch of bogus stuff, but what I said is true if it is true.
 
  • #14
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Darcie @ April 16 2003,10:46)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">A note on red dragons:  They should breed true, but like any breed, not all will be 'show' quality.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Red Dragon is a cultivar or cultivated variety.  It took years of selective breeding and inbreeding to develope the plant we all know as Red Dragon.  The inbreeding is one of the reasons the Red Dragon is not as vigorous as some of the other varieties.  The only way to reproduce it is vegetatively, ie, leaf cuttings, offshoots, and TC.  That doesn't mean that its seeds won't produce a plant that resembles a true Red Dragon.  But technically it is not a true Red Dragon as it is not a clone of the original Red Dragon.  Anything produced sexually is technically refered to as an F1 seed/plant for the first generation, F2 for the second generation and so on.  This indicates that it has Red Dragon parentage but is not a true Red Dragon.  This is true of the other VFT cultivars also.  None of them breed true.  All you have is VFT seed with the influence of their particular parent.

There was another thread posted not to long ago about this same subject.  I will try to find it and post the link to it.
 
  • #15
Eureka!  Here's the post I was looking for.

This is from Drosera x "california sunset", Seed.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Vic Brown @ Nov. 03 2002,2:28)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">D. filiformis x 'California Sunset' is a hybrid which has been selected for it's exceptional vigor and beauty. It is an F1 hybrid, the result of crossing ssp. filiformis 'Florida Giant' with ssp. tracyi. If you allow it to self-fertilize, the resultant offspring (F2 hybrids) will not be true to the parent plant, they might closely resemble it, but are unlikely to match it for good looks.

It is wrong to pass off F2 hybrids as the original cultivar, as well as introucing mis-named, inferior plants into cultivation, causing confusion, it is very disrepectful to the original plant breeder and all the effort they have put into hybridizing, selecting and vegetatively cultivating a plant, hence the name 'cultivar' . This goes for all plants, not just CP's. If you do produce F2 hybrids, hey they're your plants to do what you want with after all, make sure any plants you distribute are clearly labelled as F2 hybrids and not as the original cultivar. There are already far to many dubious versions of plant cultivars out in CP land as it is! For example, I've seen loads of D. binata 'Marston Dragons' in collections over here in the UK that are clearly not the true cultivar, and are all almost certainly the result of seed produced by selfing the genuine plant somewhere along the line. I think I've the real McCoy, it came from Marston's. There's nothing wrong with producing F2 hybrids if you want, as long as you don't think they are or tell others they are the parent hybrid.

Cheers
Vic[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

Edit 4-16-03 @ 9:28
Looks like I need to change F1 in my previous post to F2 and change F2 to F3.
wink.gif
 
  • #16
Tim,

Do you happen to know if the the owner of the greenhouse attends the LACPS meetings? I remember a person who frequently sells large healthy P.moranensis, and D.spathulata who says that he owns a small nursery in central or N.California.
 
  • #17
Well, he has those two varieties, and I hear he just does the trade and orchid shows. I'll try to get him to start posting here.
 
  • #18
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (BigCarnivourKid @ April 17 2003,04:52)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Red Dragon is a cultivar or cultivated variety.  It took years of selective breeding and inbreeding to develope the plant we all know as Red Dragon.  The inbreeding is one of the reasons the Red Dragon is not as vigorous as some of the other varieties.  The only way to reproduce it is vegetatively, ie, leaf cuttings, offshoots, and TC.  That doesn't mean that its seeds won't produce a plant that resembles a true Red Dragon.  But technically it is not a true Red Dragon as it is not a clone of the original Red Dragon.  Anything produced sexually is technically refered to as an F1 seed/plant for the first generation, F2 for the second generation and so on.  This indicates that it has Red Dragon parentage but is not a true Red Dragon.  This is true of the other VFT cultivars also.  None of them breed true.  All you have is VFT seed with the influence of their particular parent.

There was another thread posted not to long ago about this same subject.  I will try to find it and post the link to it.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
First, a quick note about "years of selective breeding." It's actually the result of a single cross: "Holland Red" X 'Sawtooth.' Although, crossing these two plants should produce "typical/green" plants. I've often speculated that the 'Red Dragon' is the result of selfing the "Holland Red." Ron Gagliardo assures me that he removed all of the anthers from the "Holland Red" prior to making the cross.
A second note about cultivars. While selfing the 'Red Dragon' will technically produce other clones, they too could potentially be called 'Red Dragon.' In terms of describing a cultivar, a plant simply needs to fit the description to be called the cultivar. This is why a cultivar description should be thorough and even include a picture. The description should be thorough enough to exclude similar plants. I know that this doesn't sound right but, this is the convention. Pedigree isn't even significant; if crossing the "cup" with a 'Fused Tooth' produced a plant that fit the cultivar description of the 'Red Dragon,' it too could be called 'Red Dragon.'
Personally, I like to be sure of the exact clone. And I suspect this is the feeling of most people.
imduff
 
  • #19
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (imduff @ April 17 2003,07:25)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">First, a quick note about "years of selective breeding." It's actually the result of a single cross: "Holland Red" X 'Sawtooth.'[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
My bad
sad.gif
.  Thanks for that info imduff.  I could only remember what was stated in another similar discussion.  I should have dug a little deeper.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Personally, I like to be sure of the exact clone. And I suspect this is the feeling of most people.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Me too.  I want the real thing, not someone's knock-off of it.  While I might have the legal right to call a plant that I 'create' a Red Dragon, I feel that it would not be moral.  No matter how much it looked like a Red Dragon.
 
  • #20
I've noticed that alot of so called Varieties or 'Cultivars'
don't look that much different from other varieties.

I think much of it is profit driven; to one up the competition.
When you put words in like GIANT or FANG; they sell!
 
Back
Top