Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 21:42:52 +0000 From: "Doug Fraser" <D.Fraser@bom.gov.au> To: cp@opus.hpl.hp.com Message-Id: <aabcdefg7$foo@default> Subject: Nepenthes naming
Happy New Year all,
I have spent the last few days relabelling my nepenthes as the
original tags have faded in some cases. I have a number of queries
that I was hoping someone could help me with. Firstly I have a plant
labelled N. spectabilis x bongso, should that now be labelled as N.
spectabilis x talangensis? Is bongso a synonym for talangensis? If so
does this mean that the name N. bongso should theoretically become
obsolete, or does N. bongso refer to a distinct morphological
subgrouping within the species, N. talangensis? I also have a plant
labelled N. rafflesiana x stenophylla, should this plant also be
relabelled as N. rafflesiana x fallax? If so should the name N.
stenophyllabe used for this species or should it be replaced by N.
fallax in all nepenthes collections? My next query is in relation to
the identification of seedlings that may arise from a nepenthes cross
I have done between a female N. rafflesiana (white) with the pollen
from N rafflesiana(brunei) x N. rafflesiana (singapore giant). This
should produce the species N. rafflesiana. It is highly improbable or
impossible that such a cross would take place in nature. Should such
crosses (I use the word loosely) be assigned cultivar names to
seperate them from naturally occuring variations within the same
species? I last query is unfortunately about a plant or plants that I
do not own and if the exploitation of nepenthes in the wild continues
may in fact never get to see. Are N. aristolochioides and N. tudjah
one and the same? If so which is the correct name?
Please bare with my ignorance as you may be the only one able to
correct it.
Meryl Fraser Townsville Australia
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Jan 02 2001 - 17:30:58 PST