Jump to content

My Big boy


Morph

Recommended Posts

I like Cephalotus "Big Boy" clone... I wish that it was a registered cultivar though. I thought about registering it myself, crediting it to the original grower obviously, but I'm not sure that he would be happy about that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Morph you're gonna enjoy your Bigboy. It's a real vigorous grower, nice big pitchers, seems a bit tougher than other Cephs, just a great plant. I see you've potted it up with lot's of room on a nice big mound, now that's how to pamper your Ceph :D

Thnx all and yes I already like it very mutch :P

And yes I have made it like that because the plant can stay for long without repott for a long time.

Your red moss is shipped also (:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

Truly a great form and one of my favourites as well. Love the colour and texture. Eden black is on my Christmas list, if anyone has one spare (how long is the waiting list, TC?). There is only 2 registered varieties of Cephalotus, if I not mistaken (Hummer's giant & Eden black). Maybe we could all sign a request to have Big boy registered? Why don't every one interested reply to this thread, just as inspiration or assistance to the original grower, "Fredg". Lovely plant Fred.

bigboy.gif

bigboy1.gif

bigboy2.gif

Riaan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don't need people to sign a request to have it registered as a cultivar, you just need to publish a description and picture in a recognised journal. It is unlikely that FredG will read this thread as he is no longer a member of this forum, or other CP forums as far as I know. He might not be happy to find out that someone registered it without consulting him though.

http://www.carnivorousplants.org/cultivars...tivarsmain.html

There are quite a few unregistered Cephalotus varieties:

Cephalotus "Adrian Slack"

Cephalotus x ["Adrian Slack" x "Phil Mann"]

Cephalotus "Big Boy"

Cephalotus "Czech Giant"

Cephalotus "Double-Ribbed"

Cephalotus "Dudley Watts"

Cephalotus "Eden Black Sister"

Cephalotus "German Giant"

Cephalotus "Giant"

Cephalotus "Julie Jones"

Cephalotus "Munich Giant"

Cephalotus "Nornalup Red Leaf"

Cephalotus "Phil Mann"

Cephalotus "Slack Giant"

Cephalotus "Vigorous Clumping"

List source from: http://www.cpphotofinder.com/

Edited by mobile
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the info mobile, any idea why he left and his standing on getting the form published and registered? Might try to persuade him at least to grant permission to pursue this and attribute him.

I have an idea of why he left but that's history. In order to persuade him you would need contact details and for privacy reasons I am not sure that anyone will supply you with them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

but the main question is "does this plant merit cultivar status?" If it does, how would you describe it? I cannot think of a description which would easily separate it from any other Cephalotus placed alongside...if it cannot be easily separated, should it be?

Would it not merit it in the same way as 'Hummer's Giant' does?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting thoughts! How is Hummer's Giant described?

EDIT: Here we go -

N: $[Cephalotus ' Hummer's Giant ' {J.Hummer}]

P: Carniv.Pl.Newslett.29:119 (2000)

PW: www.carnivorousplants.org/cpn/Species/v29n4p116_122.html#hummers

S: =[Cephalotus follicularis {Labill.}]

B: J.Hummer, Arlington, VA, USA, 9. 1986

Nominant: J.Hummer, 3. 4. 2000

Registrant: J.Hummer, 10. 5. 2000

HC: Registered 29. 1. 2001 {JS}

Description: Carniv.Pl.Newslett.29:119 (2000)

"This particular clone produces pitcher leaves up to 6 (-8) cm (2.5-3 inches) in length and about 2.5 cm (1 inch) in width. It usually takes about three years for plantlets grown from leaf cuttings to reach maturity and full size. (...) Since at maturity this clone reaches much larger sizes than normal [Cephalotus {Labill.}] plants in cultivation, I am establishing it as a cultivar (...)."

taken from http://www.omnisterra.com/botany/cp/pictur...alot/cindex.htm

Edited by Macro
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would it not merit it in the same way as 'Hummer's Giant' does?

I don't think 'Hummer's Giant' does merit it, it is an awful description. The way the description is worded, any plant with pitchers "to 6 cm (2.5 inches) in length and about 2.5 cm (1 inch) in width" could be considered to be the cultivar.

I only have one clone that matches the description, which is based on pitcher size alone, and that is Dudley Watts' clone! I have never seen a 'Hummers' Giant' with pitchers "up to 6 cm (2.5 inches) in length", therefore I have never seen a true 'Hummers' Giant'. Grow it in shade and you may get larger pitchers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think 'Hummer's Giant' does merit it, it is an awful description. The way the description is worded, any plant with pitchers "to 6 cm (2.5 inches) in length and about 2.5 cm (1 inch) in width" could be considered to be the cultivar.

I only have one clone that matches the description, which is based on pitcher size alone, and that is Dudley Watts' clone! I have never seen a 'Hummers' Giant' with pitchers "up to 6 cm (2.5 inches) in length", therefore I have never seen a true 'Hummers' Giant'. Grow it in shade and you may get larger pitchers.

Stephen, you must have wrongly labelled your "Dudley Watts'" clone, it is clearly a 'Hummer's Giant', as it matches the cultivar description :wink::evil:

Edited by mobile
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stephen, you must have wrongly labelled your "Dudley Watts'" clone, it is clearly a 'Hummer's Giant', as it matches the cultivar description :wink::evil:

Clearly.

The editor's note is unhelpful and, plainly, incorrect with the usual US-centric bias...

I note the John grows all his Cephalotus indoors, presumably under lights? Perhaps this illustrates some of the dangers of publishing cultivars grown in artificial conditions, which perhaps do not then show their true nature when exposed to "real" light. Drosera 'Big Easy' (sic) springs to mind for some reason...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clearly.

The editor's note is unhelpful and, plainly, incorrect with the usual US-centric bias...

I note the John grows all his Cephalotus indoors, presumably under lights? Perhaps this illustrates some of the dangers of publishing cultivars grown in artificial conditions, which perhaps do not then show their true nature when exposed to "real" light. Drosera 'Big Easy' (sic) springs to mind for some reason...

It brings into question whether a clone should be given cultivar status if its characteristics cannot be readily reproduced. The pitchers on my now established 'Hummer's Giant' are smaller than those on my "clumping form", growing in the same location.

Edited by mobile
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stephen,

You have a Cephalotus clone that you refer to as "clumping form", I too have one that I refer to with the same name. I don't know the origin of yours, or the true origin of mine, but they match the same name description. So, these two plants might or might not be from the same origin. However, if you or I register the name as a cultivar, with the characteristic being 'clumping', then basically we can both call the plant the same cultivar... even though it might not be the same clone... how bazaar!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...