we may have touched on this already. I realize the latter is considered a
synonym, but can someone describe what N. philippinensis is lookes like?
The reason I am asking is because I grow both of them and I don't believe
that the plant I have as N. philippinensis looks like an alata at all. Sure,
superficially the plant could be confused with an alata but there are several
distinct differences that I can see. First, my alata has an appendage on the
frot part of the lid like N. maxima, and a hint of a basal crest on the hood.
the philippinensis has a basal crest that is almost as pronounced as in
pilosa or maxima, but there is no appendage. When the pitchers are young
they are covered with a furry indumentum that has led me to think that the
pitchers aborted only to find that they have grown to maturity, alata has
very little, and is almost glabrous. The alata pitcher is hipped with a
globose base and a more or less round mouth opening, whereas the
philippinensis pitcher has a rather uniform unhipped oval shape to it with an
oval mouth opening much like N. tentaculata. The leaves of the two are very
similar but the petioles of the philippinensis is winged, which is different
from distinctly petioled leaf od N. alata. Lastly, and I realize pitcher
color is regarded only minorly in taxonomy. Alata is mostly green with some
red, the philippinensis is red with some green, with a red lid. You can see
how I feel that the two plants are distinct and should be considered seperate
species.
Comments anyone?
Christoph