|
Post by lloyd on Aug 2, 2016 15:23:27 GMT -5
Mimicry is also interesting, although not germane here.
|
|
|
Post by Dennis Z on Aug 2, 2016 16:01:21 GMT -5
Mimicry is also interesting, although not germane here. Maybe I'll make that a topic for next time. Biology is an interesting subject. Funfact: During my grade 11 advanced placement biology course in highschool, I used carnivorous plants to explain most of the short answer questions on my plant test. I even drew a Sarracenia purpurea and Utricularia cornuta on the page since I had extra time left over.
|
|
|
Post by Apoplast on Aug 2, 2016 19:20:36 GMT -5
Hi Dennis - Love the contest concept! I do want to suggest that perhaps your questions and answers are a bit confusing. For the "largest" species, you've chosen the one with the biggest pitchers (or one of the ones), and for your "smallest" you've chosen the smallest plant. If you were going to be consistent with the going for "largest" and "smallest" then perhaps the largest is perhaps N. bicalcarata which can grow to length of 20m. That's a solid sized plant.
I'm just giving you a hard time, but it was interesting to think about what makes a Nepenthes "largest".
|
|
|
Post by lloyd on Aug 2, 2016 19:34:00 GMT -5
Don't forget the roots.
|
|
|
Post by WillyCKH on Aug 2, 2016 19:45:34 GMT -5
Hi Dennis - Love the contest concept! I do want to suggest that perhaps your questions and answers are a bit confusing. For the "largest" species, you've chosen the one with the biggest pitchers (or one of the ones), and for your "smallest" you've chosen the smallest plant. If you were going to be consistent with the going for "largest" and "smallest" then perhaps the largest is perhaps N. bicalcarata which can grow to length of 20m. That's a solid sized plant. I'm just giving you a hard time, but it was interesting to think about what makes a Nepenthes "largest". 20m!? woah!
|
|
|
Post by Dennis Z on Aug 2, 2016 20:36:15 GMT -5
Hi Dennis - Love the contest concept! I do want to suggest that perhaps your questions and answers are a bit confusing. For the "largest" species, you've chosen the one with the biggest pitchers (or one of the ones), and for your "smallest" you've chosen the smallest plant. If you were going to be consistent with the going for "largest" and "smallest" then perhaps the largest is perhaps N. bicalcarata which can grow to length of 20m. That's a solid sized plant. I'm just giving you a hard time, but it was interesting to think about what makes a Nepenthes "largest". Lol, interesting. I thought N. rajah was the largest plant by size and the one with the largest pitchers. Vice versa for N. argentii, is there a pitcher plant with smaller pitchers? You learn something everyday, thanks for making the post!
|
|
|
Post by Apoplast on Aug 3, 2016 11:46:25 GMT -5
Hi Lloyd - True fact! Have you seen the roots on plant in the N. thorelii complex? Awesome stuff! is there a pitcher plant with smaller pitchers? Hi Dennis - Good question! Some of the west Sumatran species have quite small pitchers too, but I'm not sure. This is a case where you might expect he smallest plant to also have the smallest pitchers, but as you get larger the variation might increase because it allows a plant to either have large or small pitchers. I could imagine a gnat specialist that grows into the forest canopy, but has tiny pitchers. The opposite would be hard to picture, as you run into physical and physiological limits. You can't have the largest pitchers on the smallest plant, as the smallest plant would fit into the largest pitchers. Plus, energetically trying to maintain a very large pitcher from a tiny plant would likely be impossible. Fun though exercise though!
|
|
|
Post by Dennis Z on Aug 3, 2016 12:02:22 GMT -5
Hi Lloyd - True fact! Have you seen the roots on plant in the N. thorelii complex? Awesome stuff! is there a pitcher plant with smaller pitchers? Hi Dennis - Good question! Some of the west Sumatran species have quite small pitchers too, but I'm not sure. This is a case where you might expect he smallest plant to also have the smallest pitchers, but as you get larger the variation might increase because it allows a plant to either have large or small pitchers. I could imagine a gnat specialist that grows into the forest canopy, but has tiny pitchers. The opposite would be hard to picture, as you run into physical and physiological limits. You can't have the largest pitchers on the smallest plant, as the smallest plant would fit into the largest pitchers. Plus, energetically trying to maintain a very large pitcher from a tiny plant would likely be impossible. Fun though exercise though! Indeed so! I was thinking that the smallest plant may have the smallest pitcher size simply due to physiological limits of a smaller plant. Perhaps some nepenthes that are yet to be discovered have tiny uppers suited for whatever special niche they fit in, but I would believe that N. argentii has the smallest pitchers in the genus until I see another plant with smaller ones.
|
|