|
|
Post by vraev on Aug 2, 2008 23:01:38 GMT -5
Actually there is a lot of controversy on that point. I wouldn't agree that a cultivar (Cultivated variety) can be started from seed. A B-52 is only a B-52 when it is reproduced from that original B-52 produced years ago. Heck....for a while ppl said that red vfts can only be produced by cuttings but with red seedlings myself, I wouldn't say that they are a red dragon or a full red vft. They are unique VFT's with their own independent assortment of chromosomes with have led to a random selection of traits of which the SINGLE trait of color seems to be the one we see.
|
|
|
|
Post by cteichreb on Aug 4, 2008 21:40:09 GMT -5
Controversy or not, the fact remains that if a plant exhibits all of the characteristics contained within the cultivar description, it can in fact be called by that cultivar name. If the cultivar description states that reproduction is by asexual means only, then producing another identical looking plant through your own crosses and naming it that cultivar would be immoral, but if it looks the same, nobody is going to be able to spot the difference short of mapping out the DNA.
This is definitely a downfall of cultivars and points to the importance of being very detailed with your cultivar description. Fact is, there are dozens of cultivars that really aren't worthy of a cultivar name as evidenced by the fact that they exist but nobody grows them! Those ones that are deemed worthy by the growing public generally are reproduced asexually, especially tc since it produced many more plants in a short period of time. However, if it can be reproduced by seed and show the same characteristics as the registered cultivar description, then it can be called by that cultivar name.
One other cultivar that is reproduced by seed all the time, Drosera 'Albino', aka D. capensis "alba".
Chris
|
|
|
|
Post by vraev on Aug 5, 2008 23:38:01 GMT -5
well....I guess we just have to agree to disagree.
In case of seed based reproduction, the blurry line is because species like drosera can self fertilize themselves. In that case naturally there will be a selection of seedlings with the traits that are similar to the parents.
However, in plants such as nepenthes, a specific cultivar or a named variety can only be attributed to a specifc plant. For instance, a plant called N.ampullaria "Cantley's red" is only reproduced by cuttings. It was the only plant in the batch of seedlings which showed the full red coloring.
In dionaea, the B52 is only the B52 if it is a cutting from an original B52 plant. If its a seedling...its just another different venus fly trap: A "typical" VFT.
Same holds true for cephalotus. There is one cultivar registered apart from the typical: Eden Black. Now that is the one and only one plant produced from seed in a UK collection. THe plant is only produced by cuttings and the waiting lists are spanning decades to get a cutting of that plant. No other ceph has that intense black coloration and even if any come close....they cannot be called EDEN BLACK.
|
|
|
|
Post by cteichreb on Aug 8, 2008 17:13:33 GMT -5
Actually, I think we do agree on most points here. Anyways, no point in beating a dead horse at this point. I did want to note that there is another Cephalotus cultivar, 'Hummer's Giant'. The 'Eden Black' sounds like quite the plant though!
|
|
|
|
Post by keehno on Aug 11, 2008 9:31:29 GMT -5
Mid-summer B52   |
|
|
|
Post by Flytrap on Aug 11, 2008 10:44:57 GMT -5
that's no flytrap! That's a BEAR trap! ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Rick Hillier on Aug 11, 2008 11:27:11 GMT -5
Yepper... you step on that and kiss your foot goodbye!
|
|
