13 replies to this topic

[bearphant]

Hello, i have some doubts about 2 of my plants:
1) obtained as S. purpurea subsp. venosa, but could it be a S. rosea, due to the pinkish colouration of the petals?






2) obtained as S. x rehderi = S. rubra x minor), but it has little white spots, in low number, on only some of the pitchers (possibly you can see them on the 2 smaller pitchers below)... can it still be a rehderi? is it a more complex hybrid (introgressed?)? is it a pure S. rubra (and which subspecies?)?



Thanks.

[Alexis]

The spots are light windows inherited from the minor parent.

[James O'Neill]

I expect the venosa is just that - a little too dark for burkii

[bearphant]

thank you guys, so the first plant is just a venosa, and the second one is just a rehderi with very few minor traits..!?

[James O'Neill]

bearphant, on 11 June 2012 - 15:23 PM, said:

thank you guys, so the first plant is just a venosa, and the second one is just a rehderi with very few minor traits..!?

I wouldn't say that it has few minor traits, compare it to a pure rubra and you will see that it has quite a bit of minor influence. Colouration, veining, overhanging hood, slight fenestration etc.

[ada]

It could be a burkeii,the petals of true venosa are red.Burkeii petals are usually much lighter in colour.It could be a hybrid of the two,but without a picture of the pitcher its hard to say,cameras can make colours appear different to what they really are.
I would go with burkeii myself.
ada

[bearphant]

these are pictures of the plant:





And this is the flower of my S. purpurea subsp. purpurea... the difference in colour is remarkable:

Edited by bearphant, 08 January 2013 - 20:46 PM.

[bearphant]

i'd like to repropose the thread, also adding two other sarrs:
- Sarracenia rubra subsp. gulfensis



- Sarracenia rubra subsp. gulfensis f. luteoviridis


Are they right?

Edited by bearphant, 08 January 2013 - 20:49 PM.

[Ordovic]

Yeah they look about right to me.
btw S. p. venosa burkii have short flower stems.

[bearphant]

it did have a shorter flower stem than that of S. p. purpurea! It was 15-20cm tall, against 30cm of the latter.

Edited by bearphant, 08 January 2013 - 23:23 PM.

[Alexis]

Burkii flowers can sometimes be more of a dark pink or magenta. The white style should give it away though.

[bearphant]

unfortunately i don't remember the style colour, anyway i'll let it flower again this year and check. If it's white, it's a burkii? and what colour is that of the nominal variety? Could the plant be an intraspecific hybrid (like Ada suggested)?

[Dave Evans]

Yes, in Europe there has been a terrible mistake with regard to S. rosea vs. S. purpurea.

Many growers simply deleted the last part of the name under the impression it was superflous.  The name is Sarracenia purpurea venosa burkii.  Since books keep being published that state these two are the same taxon, many people are under the impression all "burkii" refers to is a pink flowered variation of venosa, not an entirely different taxon.  They have been bred together for years and years now.  Its really quite sad that these hybrids are being distributed as good examples of S. purpurea venosa.  The photos do appear to depict a plant with intermediate characteristics, but looks generally more like S. rosea...

The flower odors are different for each species and the hybrid too...  So might help you ID it better...

Edited by Dave Evans, 09 January 2013 - 23:56 PM.

[bearphant]

Thank you Dave! Keeping your words in mind, all i have to do is to wait untill it flowers again.
I'll let also my presumed S. p. venosa var. venosa flower, to do a comparison.

Edited by bearphant, 10 January 2013 - 09:44 AM.