Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 15:38:05 From: SCHLAUER@chemie.uni-wuerzburg.de To: cp@opus.hpl.hp.com Message-Id: <aabcdefg3446$foo@default> Subject: Re: sub-carnivores
Dear Peter,
> "Bruce (1905[typo? - 1995 perhaps, or is this another Ibicellaesque
> case of cheese and wishful thinking?]) did some investigations
> on Byblis gigantea growing near Perth in Western Australia that showed
> positive results, but did not examine Byblis liniflora"[op.cit.] while
> Hartmeyer confined his tests to B.liniflora in demonstrating a lack of
> enzyme secretion.
The Bruce paper is indeed very old. In these tests, the colour change
of proteinaceous items like cheese, albumin etc. was regarded as
positive proof of digestion. This method is now accepted to be
misleading in many cases (cf. _Ibicella_; the tale of carnivory in
this genus has originated with cheese in 1908 - not 1998! - and was
since spread throughout the literature until our days without any
recent experimental evidence!). The film test is far more reliable
and reproducible.
> Anyone heard any more about B.gigantea? This will be another headache
> family if this sp. does produce enzymes :) and of course, now we have
> several more spp. in the genus to wonder about...
These latter species are all closely related to (or conspecific with)
_B. liniflora_, so the results will likely be very similar to Siggi
Hartmeyer's.
AFAIK, a paper on taxa (segregate split-off species?) of the _B.
gigantea_ alliance is in preparation or in press, so there will be
even more taxa to test.
However, at the moment there is reliable evidence for sub-carnivory
in one taxon of _Byblis_ and no comparably useful evidence for the
rest, so the bona-fide status of Byblidaceae is sub-carnivorous,
nothing else. This status may be changed by new facts, not by
regurgitating the old Bruce story.
Kind regards
Jan
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Jan 02 2001 - 17:31:38 PST