> (mirabilis (LOUR.) DRUCE * thorelii LECOMTE)
> *
> (northiana HOOK.F. * maxima REINW.EX NEES)
>
>The proper names in capital letters are confusing to me,
These are the names of the *authors* who originally described the species.
Sometimes, the epithet alone is ambiguous (cf. the homonyms of
_Pinguicula_vulgaris_ L.)
>and I hope I won't offend anyone by writing the hybrid
>as:
> (mirabilis*thorelii)*(northiana*maxima)
>
>since I want a rough idea of the species that comprise this
>hybrid.
No problem, but you should indicate the genus:
Nepenthes (mirabilis*thorelii)*(northiana*maxima)
>Do you (or anyone else on the list) know what this Nepenthes
>looks like? Are the pitchers large, small, ovate, cylindrical,
>mottled or plain (etc.)?
Nepenthes * ' Ile de France ' Y.VEZIER ex KUSAKABE, CARNIV.PL.NEWSL.12:6 (1983)
=> Try to check CPN 12:6 (1983) but I fear it is not appropriately
described/depicted there.
>From the parentage I would expect a rather unspectacular plant (tutti
frutti), impossible to identify in the average greenhouse. The remarkable
characters of _N.maxima_ and _N.northiana_ are already weakened/lost in the
primary hybrid between these two (rather striking) species. However, some
people can even grow _N.mirabilis_ into an imposing plant...
>What are its preferred growing conditions, in the range of
>Nepenthes climates?
The hybrid cannot be expected to originate (& grow) spontaneously at any
place on this planet because _N.thorelii_ is endemic to Indochina while
_N.northiana_ is endemic to Borneo, and Indochina does not overlap with
Borneo. Thus, there is no natural habitat for this plant.
The parentage suggests a place in the "lowland" greenhouse.
Yes, and add 1/4 of the limestone you normally give to your _N.northiana_
(the only calcicole species involved in the hybrid)! ;-)
Kind regards
Jan