Full Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by jcz

  1. Thank you very much for your answers, ada! Yes, it is very frustrating sometimes. Nigel, your webpage looks particularly nice and by no means I was referring to you with my message (I have not ordered yet plants from you, so obviously I cannot provide any opinion). But there was no confusion, I was talking about professional sellers, not just people who had a few extra plants and sell them from time to time. I may order something next season if I can get some more space, hehe, for instance to broaden my Sarracenia purpurea collection. By the way, the S. purpurea subsp. venosa you offer in the webpage, is it S. purpurea var. venosa, S. purpurea var. montana or S. purpurea var. burkii (= S. rosea)? Thanks!
  2. Hi! I am trying to broaden my Utricularia collection and I have found that missidentifications are not that unusual, so I wanted to ask, in general, what do you think that can be done when a seller is offering a plant which is missidentified. I am talking mainly about professional sellers and "normal" orders (something offered with a price and you order it), not amateurs or exchanges. I guess that, if a professional is selling a product, they should have some responsibility about its identity, don't you think so? The problem is that, in some cases, to properly identify a plant it is sometimes necessary to grow it during a quite long period until it is adult or until it flowers, so it may be weird to ask for any responsibility after several months or even years. On the other hand, according to your experience, are normally sellers wanting to correct misslabeled products? I have only informed sellers a couple of times about missidentifications, and they only said something like: "this is what I want under that name", showing no or little interest about it. Thank you very much in advance for sharing your experience on this topic!
  3. jcz


    So you are clearly using Sphagnum as potting media! This last one is linked with Sphagnum. It looks like the very common Galerina paludosa, although there are some species (and even different genera) of Fungi growing on Sphagnum and developing fruitbodies with a close appearance.
  4. jcz


    Nice specimens. It is for sure a Leucocoprinus. I do not see the colour of the scales very accurately, and Leucocoprinus species are often difficult to distinguish, but if the scales are definitely lilac-purplish it may be L. ianthinus/L. lilacinogranulosus (depending if you consider them as different species or not).
  5. jcz

    My Sphagnum

    Now, it is!! Congratulations The details are magnificient to show the differences. I have also found it in my pots, I send another comparison of a species that probably belongs to S. sect. Sphagnum and S. squarrosum. Such a lovely genus.
  6. I am not sure if I am still in time to participate, but I will bid £5.
  7. I agree with Karsty, though the exact composition of slate is somewhat variable. Keep an eye on the terrarium to see if the plants like it. Regarding the vinegar proof, it only serves as an orientation of the presence of a limited number of carbonates, mainly sodium and potasium carbonates, but those are very soluble and normally not present in many rocks. With the common calcium carbonate it will work if the solution is not too cold and if the rock contains not many impurities. But you may have, for instance, magnesite (magnesium carbonate) and even dolomite (magnesium and calcium carbonate) and will not see bubbles at all. What is more, not even using stronger acid solutions, such as clorhidric acid, you will always see fizz on a rock containing carbonates (with calcium carbonate works well in this case).
  8. Thanks! And no, they have stalked glands, or glanduliferous trichomes, as you prefer :-)
  9. Thank you! I used a simple Canon EOS 700D with 60 mm macro lens. I took the photos rather quickly, so I used the flash incorporated in the camera for taking freehand photos, instead of using the tripod. Nothing special. The substrate is the common CP substrate, about 50% peat and 50% quartz sand, with a bit more sand on the top.
  10. Just a simple comparison of a root-like stem, a leaf-like stem, and a true but transformed leaf (trap) in Utricularia aureomaculata.
  11. jcz

    My Sphagnum

    I am sooo glad to see someone interested in the biology and taxonomy of plants, that I want to say at least "good luck and cheer up!" Some Sphagnum species can be identified with hand lens of medium magnification (let's say, about 10X). Important characters are the morphology of rameal and caulinar phylidia, the arrangement of the branches, if they are all more or less equal or not, the colour (sometimes), the ecology, etc. Or at least, it should be possible to identify them up to the section level. I am unfortunately really busy now, but I will try to get some free time and identify some of my Sphagnum. If there is something interesting to you, of course I will colaborate by sending you samples :-) I am almost sure I have the true S. squarrosum.
  12. Just to provide a few more information, not all Pinguicula are as rain lovers in nature as you may imagine. In fact, many of the epiphytic or lithophytic species clearly prefer places rather protected from rain. I mean, they love a humid substrate, often with running water, but keeping the leaves relatively dry and protected from rain. This is obviously not applicable to the several species that often grow in exposed places, such as meadows and bogs. High variation for a highly diverse genus!
  13. It clearly depends on what species you will grow. A Pinguicula garden can be planted in a few centimetres of soil, while adult Sarracenia appreciate deep soil. I am pretty bad estimating numbers, but with about 20 centimetres depth I would say that you can grow almost all carnivorous plants.
  14. I agree with carambola. Besides, was the "less green colour" the only problem you noted? Perhaps they were too green because they were receiving less light than the optimal. They are apparently healthy to me.
  15. In fact, that is a really good suggestion! Among the plant offer at Carnivoria.eu there is also U. biloba, so I would not be very surprised if a fragment of that species was mixed with U. subulata. I think I am going to start two parallel cultures from a few, clean, leaf-like organs of both types, pinnately branched and unbranched, and wait until they flower. Thank you very much!
  16. Hello. I have still very limited experience with Utricularia sect. Setiscapella and I ask for help by determining the following specimen. I got it from Carnivoria.eu as "Utricularia subulata" about three months ago. Soon it produced one chasmogamous and several cleistogamous flowers, more or less agreeing with those I expected from U. subulata, so I though the original labelling was correct. However, after growing a lot during the last month, I observed a vigorous growth of pinnate leaf-like organs, which I have not seen in images and descriptions of U. subulata. Now, I suspect of U. trichophylla, which may have flowers resembling those of U. subulata, even Taylor (1989) commented and illustrated the presence of both chasmogamous and cleistogamous inflorescescens. However, I did not checked the calix nerviation and I have never grown it before, so I am not sure. I will try to check the micromorphology of the bladders someday. Could you help me with the current limited data, or should I wait until it flowers again? Let´s think on the possibility that two species were mixed, this one with pinnate leaf-like organs, and perhaps the true U. subulata, since I observed also some unbranched leaf-like organs arising from the substrate. Thank you!
  17. I like very much Sarracenia purpurea s.l. plants as well, because I only have a rather windy place for growing Sarracenia and, of course, S. purpurea s.l. resist really well by being so stout. Also, they look pretty nice year round. Common plants, but not boring plants! The 'Melissa Mazur´is something I should get someday But I think the clone is not so widespread; may I ask where did you find it? Thank you!
  18. jcz

    My Sphagnum

    I am not sure about the identity of your "Sphagnum squarrosum". While the plants may look like S. squarrosum, the filidia (plant gametophytes have no leaves, leaves are restricted to sporophytes) seem to be cucculate, and not just pointed and involute as commonly seen in S. squarrosum. I would have a look at the species of S. sect. Sphagnum, for instance S. palustre, which may be superficially similar to S. squarrosum. However, my knowledge on the Sphagnum taxonomy is really poor, I hope someone else could help you more. The brown dots are likely amounts of various organic acids, among other things; they should dissolve in warm water after some time.
  19. Hi! Indeed, you will hardly see any utricle on the leaves of Utricularia subg. Polypompholix, because leaves in that subgenus are likely "true leaves", and not just leaf-like stems, as in most (all?) species of U. subg. Bivalvaria and U. subg. Utricularia. In U. subg. Polypompholix you will see separatedly the non-carnivorous, "normal" leaves, and the carnivorus, utricle-modified leaves, both directly connected to the variously shaped stems. In some species, such as U. volubilis, it is easy to see a transition between non-carnivorous and carnivorous leaves. In the other two subgenera perphaps all true leaves have been transformed into utricles, and this is why species developed leaf-like organs from stems, to substitute true leaves. Then, it is not surprising that utricles (modified leaves) arise from any kind of stem, including leaf-like stems. However, at least to me, it is difficult to tell sometimes if you are looking at a leaf-like stem or at a true leaf. Let's think on U. sect. Orchidioides... who would say that those plants have no true leaves?! It would be interesting to know if there is any recent study particularly focused on the ontogeny and genetics of the Utricularia anatomy.