Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 00:26:09 -0400 From: "Dave Evans" <dpevans@rci.rutgers.edu> To: cp@opus.hpl.hp.com Message-Id: <aabcdefg2448$foo@default> Subject: Re: S. purpurea Subspecies
> Does this then mean that they could possibly burkei groups? This would
> really be neat. Maybe they are crosses between the two subspecies! Is
this
> also possible?
Sorry, I think I confused you a bit.... The burkei plants are mostly in
Florida and they are the most different from all the other groups (named and
un-named) of _S. purpurea_. What I think is that all the plants from Canada
down to Florida/or close to Florida are really _S. purpurea purpurea_ (with
different varieties found in Canada, New Jersey, and further down into the
south). Once you get to the plants now called either _S. purpurea venosa
burkei_ or _S. rosei_ you have what I feel should be called S. purpurea
subsp. rosei. I don't think people (including me!) really understand _S.
purpurea_ that well yet, so it's rather hard to say where one kind ends and
the "hybrids" (are they hybrids or just other varieties?) begin.
I do know that the hybrid S. flava * S. purpurea venosa has a very
reliable characteristic of having a lid that goes straight up so rain
quickly fills the leaves and they fall over (same goes for the flava hybrid
w/ the purpurea purpurea plants), while the hybrid S. flava * S. rosei (or
S.purp venosa burkei) have lids that often cover the opening and much less
rain falls in... What does it mean? Anything? Maybe the burkei subspecies
is a result of hybridizing with S.flava thousands of years ago (the flowers
smell similar and the color is somewhat intermediate)... Maybe they didn't
hybridize and only evolved from the northern purp plants, or maybe the
northern plants evolved up from the south (but that doesn't seem to
likely)...
Dave Evans
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Jan 02 2001 - 17:35:11 PST