>The Japanese call it 'Sumatra alata'. However,
>this is in error, as the main characteristic of N. alata is having a large
>glanular boss under the lid - which it does not have.
1. Not only the Japanese but also DANSER (and still others, including
-well, with the appropriate hesitation- myself) named the Sumatran plants
_N.alata_. If the Sumatran population does really belong to the otherwise
Philippine taxon, there would be a similar disjunction like in
_N.sumatrana_/_N.treubiana_ because no reliable records of _N.alata_ are
known (to me) from Borneo.
2. The "glandular boss" seems to be inconstant even in _N.alata_ s.str.
>The plant was never keyed out and named due to it's common appearance
DANSER is maybe (not for myself, however!) not much, but his monograph is
certainly much more than "never".
> - but it is a new un-named species - closely related to N. tomoriana."
Not at all un-named (if properly?), and possibly not even new.
>Does this sound like any named Nepenthes any of you are familiar with,
>I would appreciate any help in solving this small mistery.
Vide supra.
Kind regards
Jan