Re: Pure, pure, species
Michael.Chamberland (23274MJC@MSU.EDU)
Mon, 21 Oct 96 23:32 EDT
> From: dave evans <T442119@rutadmin.rutgers.edu>
> > From: "Michael.Chamberland" <23274MJC@MSU.EDU>
> >
> > > I'm a purist and that's why I see the var. heterophylla as a
> > > very asinine designation for the northern S. purpurea (all-green)
> > > plants.
> >
> > Actually, it's forma _heterophylla_, not var. _heterophylla_. I've seen
> > these in habitat, albeit in only one site. There the heterophylla form
> > was growing intermixed with the normal form, with evidence of intermediate
>
> Hi Michael, are you sure they were intermediates? I thought they
> either have red or not... Sure some plants can show less red, I
> see this all the time and see greater differences in color and
> pattern from population to population. Could the intermediates
> simply have been shaded by grass or shrubs?
>
> Dave E
The leaf coloration can be deceptive, since even plants without
evidence of red color on the leaves can shoot up a big red flower!
(often this is the case with shaded plants).
Also, green pitchers which have been damaged can produce some brownish
necrotic tissue which on casual observation could make an antho-free
plant look as if it has some red in it.
Fortunately I was able to see this population in flower. Several of
the plants had very pale pink petals, others were the typical dark
red/pink. I saw only two flowers with the cream-colored petals of
S. purp. forma heterophylla. My visit was late in the flowering
season and most of the plants in the population had finished flowering,
so the heterophylla plants may have been more numerous than just two.
Michael Chamberland