FlytrapCare

Sponsor
  • Posts

    564
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

Everything posted by FlytrapCare

  1. Very nice flytraps as usual, Lucien!
  2. I too have seen similar traps on some of my plants in the spring time, but I've never seen it as a stable trait. Hopefully it is!
  3. Interesting plant! Looking forward to seeing if it is stable.
  4. FlytrapCare

    Bio 2

    Looks cool! I hope it remains stable!
  5. Very, very nice! I hope to grow one of them someday
  6. Yeah, FTS Flaming Lips is one of my favorites too. Amazing coloration, menacing looking teeth and large traps. Wonderful!
  7. Wonderful plants Antoine! I really like the Gigantea and Red Cupped Trap All of your plants have great coloration.
  8. In our experience, Coquillage seems to be quite capable of catching prey on its own.
  9. Great looking plants Lucien!
  10. As for Low Giant vs. Big Mouth, if one reads the descriptions in the Dionaea book, they're described differently, at least slightly so, in terms of coloration, growth habit, size, etc. I guess that's sufficient enough for registration purposes. And regarding the cultivars in the Dionaea book that are registered (or soon to be), I don't know what stage the registrations are in, but I think they're all final. At least that's how I understood it in the last email I received from Jan. He wrote to the group in March 2014: I have no idea who updates the cultivar database for the ICPS website or how often it is updated. It doesn't contain many of the cultivars published in the CPN and registered over the last couple of years like 'Ginormous', 'Sonic', etc., nor any of the cultivars from the "Dionaea" book, so my guess is that it is quite out of date. Again, I don't know if this thread is the best place to be asking these sorts questions. Probably best to contact the ICPS directly to get clarification for these sorts of questions.
  11. Most of these questions should be directed a Jan or someone else at the ICPS, because I know very little about the formalities of the process of registering a cultivar, not really having any interest in registering plants myself. I do know that there were no problems with the A2, Bimbo, DC XL, G14, G16, Low Giant and, Southwest Giant descriptions and all of those are mostly typical looking flytraps with larger-than-average traps and a few describable characteristics (i.e. Low Giant grows low most of the year).
  12. No, the ones that were not approved have been dropped from the agenda to do so. There was some discussion amongst the authors of the book, the people who wrote the cultivar descriptions (me -- Matt Miller -- and Mathias Maier) and Jan who was questioning some of the descriptions of the cultivars in the cases where they were not sufficiently unique from other, already registered, cultivars. In most cases, when a description of a plant wasn't unique enough, Jan would propose to drop the cultivar from the registration process unless someone could clarify and describe what made that particular cultivar unique or different from other another cultivar which was already registered.
  13. Oh, I misunderstood. In this case, I see it as the people who are judging the plant are the ones submitting it for registration. The person responsible for making registration official is only judging the description (and photos) written by the grower to ensure the plant is sufficiently unique from other registered cultivars. I thought that you meant people are submitting cultivars for registration who haven't actually grown them, which I think may have been done a time or two.
  14. That's correct. Patches originated in Australia with Geoff Roberts. He sent some to Jens Brettschneider in Germany, so perhaps that's where the confusion for Lucien came from.
  15. Absolutely! That would be a serious problem!
  16. It's true that a unique description is hard to produce for most "giant" flytraps because there are so many of them registered now and the differences between the already-registered giants and any giant flytrap that may be registered aren't likely sufficient enough to satisfy the "unique description" criteria. And who would want to grow a flytrap described as "looks like a beautiful wild typical Venus Flytrap, but much more vigorous, larger, often producing larger-than-average traps, a very impressive plant when compared with others growing in the same conditions, and an all-around SUPER Venus Flytrap!"...Sounds BORING to me Aren't there already lots and lots of flytraps in circulation that fit that description? (I'm just kidding, of course). Though I don't know if I agree with the assertion that "unique" implies "freakish". I think there are lots of unique and interesting looking flytraps which have been registered with the ICPS over the last couple of years that aren't freakish nor do they have non-functional traps. And, like you, I've never seen a B52 that lives up to its cultivar description of "vigorous growth, brightly colored traps that are up to 5.7cm (2.25 inches) long." In fact, B52 does not grow very well at all for us here in Oregon. It's definitely not one of the more vigorous plants for us. And I've never seen traps, neither in person nor in photos, on B52 anywhere near the 5.7 cm mark. I think that registration description was a bit optimistic when describing the size of the traps and the vigor of the plant. Though, I've seen some impressive photos of it, and have seen ours put out some impressively sized traps, up near or at the 5cm range, so I know it can be a nice plant. I don't have much of an inclination to attempt to officially register any of the clones we (FlytrapStore) have named. Some of them will be officially registered (they might be already) because they were published in Stewart McPherson's and Tim Bailey's Dionaea book, for which I had the honor of writing some of the cultivar descriptions. Jan Schlauer, who is in charge of keeping track of officially registered cultivars for the ICPS, intends to officially register the majority of the plants described in that publication. I believe he is the one who is responsible for determining if the description of a plant is unique enough to warrant a new cultivar. There may be others involved in that process as well. I know there were a few in the book that didn't make the cut. I think that 'FTS Maroon Monster' was in the majority that did go on to be officially registered (or will be soon). I think you (Steve) have the book, so you can probably read the description of FTS Maroon Monster published therein and compare it to descriptions of other registered red-leafed flytrap cultviars and perhaps figure out how it is sufficiently different that Jan decided to officially register the plant.
  17. I believe that this is how almost all growers think. I don't know of anyone reputable who sells flytraps who doesn't sell exact clones if they're distributing a plant with a name. And regardless of whatever perceived flaws might exist in the cultivar system, it is the only legitimate system in existence where plants' and growers' names can be officially tied together in writing. So until one registers a plant under the name they like with their name tied to it as the registrant, anyone can take the nickname for the plant and use it to register their own plant (as Phil already stated). One can even take a plant that has been widely circulated under a different name by a different grower and rename it and register it themselves, as David Conner recently did with 'Cheerleader' which used to circulate under the nickname "Pom Pom".
  18. FlytrapCare

    most traps?

    Really like that Gigantea! Very nice Lucien
  19. Very pretty variegated flytraps! I too grow quite a few of them now, including Spotty and Patches, and after some time with the plants also trying to spread the potential virus, I have not been successful. And the plants grow very vigorously and set seed well. I have some Spotty seedlings now and they're quite interesting. Some are red. Some are green. Most have short teeth. I think that perhaps the variegation in Spotty is possibly caused by a transposon or some other phenomena. For me, the plant seems to range from completely red to completely green and everything in between with occasional "spotting". It's a really interesting plant!
  20. I don't know that I've found this to be true. Yes, Europeans seem to be more into the unusual varieties of flytraps than people in the US, but I believe that's because they have far more of them. There are plenty of "freak haters" here too. In fact, just yesterday.... http://www.cpukforum.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=53297&p=357973 There are lots and lots of examples of similar posts here on CPUK.
  21. If it is stated that SD Titan is the largest flytrap ever "on average" that sounds like a statement intended to generate some hype. That along with statements such as "best flytrap ever", "huge deal", "larger than B52 or DC XL", "makes B52 and DC XL look small", etc. All of these statement made after observing the plant at maturity for less than one season? Those statements certainly seem to me to be intended to generate hype and very premature in their pronouncement. I think that's why some of the people here have posted with such responses. In any case, I DO think that SD Titan will be a great flytrap. It's just too early to tell and making such statements and claims of size, without any significant data to back it up, does sound a bit like "snake oil speak". If it were my plant, I'd just wait it out, take some photos when Titan makes some really impressive traps and then post them. Or send a specimen or two to someone with a long history of growing flytraps, such as Bob Ziemer, and ask him to express his opinion on the plant. If you have some really good photos and a testimonial from someone who has grown flytraps since 1955 and grows virtually every flytrap under the sun, that should do away with the skepticism. As an aside, this thread got me thinking: When I start thousands of flytraps from seed each year, I never have any intention of looking for giant flytraps. There are just SO MANY of them already out there, and a lot of really great giant flytraps, especially in Europe where the cultivation of unique and giant Dionaea seems to have a much longer history than in the US. Virtually any "normal" characteristic you like in a flytrap, such as prostrate growth, good coloration, upright growth, etc., can be found in a giant flytrap that is already named. And even if one gets lucky and is able to select a flytrap that seems to produce larger traps than any other giant flytrap out there, how significantly larger will they be than other giant flytraps? In terms of percentages, perhaps it would be significant. If traps were 2mm or 3 mm larger, on average, that would be 5% to 8% larger, which sounds significant. But in terms of absolute size, I don't know if 2mm or 3mm really makes a big difference to the naked eye. Certainly wouldn't to me. I know I'm in the minority, but in my opinion, giant flytraps are kind of boring. Once you've seen a few large traps, they all look the same with only small differences in growth habit. That's why I like the plants with unique coloration, unusual traps, really odd growth habit or odd trap morphology or something else that would make them stand out in a crowd. If you lined up healthy, full-sized specimens of all of the named giant cultivars, it would certainly be a sight to see. But if you started mixing in unnamed flytraps that were also larger than average, pretty soon it would be hard to tell which were the giants and which were the unnamed large flytraps (which are very common in most seed sets of plants from good genetic stock). And I'd bet that SD Titan, in that lineup, would not stand out heads and shoulders above all of the rest. But then throw in a Coquillage, or an Alien, or FTS Yellow, or Spotty, or any red-leafed variety, or Wacky Traps, or Mirror or any other unique flytrap to the lineup and that would be the one that would be interesting enough to draw my full attention
  22. It's a nice looking plant, no doubt, and quite large....nobody grows flytraps like Steve can! But, given the plant has only been grown by two people who are invested in promoting it, I think the excitement about the plant might be a little premature and the plant over hyped. 4cm+ traps aren't all that uncommon on giant flytraps, as others have pointed out. Why not wait until it produces some 5cm+ traps, which could very likely happen, and then post photos? I doubt there would be many people doubting at that point! But if the plant turns out unable to produce traps that large, then it's still a very nice flytrap that I'm sure many people would like to grow. It doesn't have to be the "biggest and best flytrap ever" to be desirable
  23. Yes, a very nice "typical" or "common" Venus flytrap