Sign in to follow this  
ThomasL

S. purpurea ssp. venosa var. montana?

Recommended Posts

Hi

I have bought this plant only as Sarracenia. I'm not sure is it a real montana or a hybrid with montana.

Wich people can help me?

The first pic is from summer and the second from today.

The flower was deep red and the pitcher is 20 cm in the length and 4 cm in the diameter so i have o lot of seeds with self pollination with no sure name.

gallery_4785_223_150966.jpg

gallery_4785_223_27501.jpg

Thanks

Edited by ThomasL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that you're right with the hybrid theory, usually they've a more closed mouth, the lid (or wings) are almost touching each other in most montana clones.

Other than that I can't help more, anyone else?

Alex.

Edited by alexa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say a hybrid too,or some intergrade with some sort of purp x venosa parentage.

But all the montanas i have and have seen all have a very closed hood appearance,unlike this plant.

ada

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

Thanks all for the Answer

I think i´t is the clone C from extreme plants.

But Clone C is a very boring name for the label.

So i can all the seeds abolish.

Bye Thomas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have not reviewed every single plant from every location, but I strongly suspect there is only one location for S. purpurea var. montana, but other locations have perhaps different kinds of purpurea...

I also don't support the idea of separating S. purpurea into two subspecies as the differences between purpurea and venosa are just plain nonexistent...

I wonder what went into that purp hybrid "C"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I also don't support the idea of separating S. purpurea into two subspecies as the differences between purpurea and venosa are just plain nonexistent...

They're very different. Until you start to look at intraspecific hybrids.

I'd say purpurea and venosa were more 'different' than venosa and burkii, which is why I don't get the rosea system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They're very different. Until you start to look at intraspecific hybrids.

I'd say purpurea and venosa were more 'different' than venosa and burkii, which is why I don't get the rosea system.

I've been out looking at S. purpurea in the field for fifteen years. You can literally find venosa like plants right next purpurea like plants in New Jersey, Delaware, Virginia (not there are any left at this point, but I did get to see some before they went extinct), New York, Pennsylvania, Georgia and Indiana. There is no clear division in S. purpurea between the northern and southern populations. There is, however, a big separation between S. purpurea and S. rosea. They are not connected and haven't been since long before people started altering water tables and other habitat reduction schemes... Though I do wonder if some of the mountain purpurea in what is considered the southern locations for S. purpurea montana might be intermediate in nature... But none of them have the short and pale flowers of S. rosea.

The only way your venosa look more like S. rosea then they do S. purpurea is because they are S. rosea which were mislabeled as S. purpurea venosa somewhere in their past history and this used to be common practice in horticultural circles.

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

@ Dave Do you mean it is a natural hybrid of some purpurea and venosa.

I think its more possible it is a clon C. The Futures are the same.

And i see only one Part of a Parent purpurea ssp. venosa var. montana.

I want to make new hybrids and crosses only with plants with a correctly and full name. I thinki will sell this plant next year.

Thank you all

Bye

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats right stephen

Its only a purpurea hybrid.

Since this year i buy only from Persons how i know the name of the plants are 100% right and this plants i can take for a selfmade cross.

I will label this plant as purpurea hybrid i think thats right and no more.

Bye

Thomas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi

@ Dave Do you mean it is a natural hybrid of some purpurea and venosa.

I think its more possible it is a clon C. The Futures are the same.

And i see only one Part of a Parent purpurea ssp. venosa var. montana.

Well, I think is this clone C plant, but I don't know what was bred together to make clone C. Looks like it could be just straight purp, but the petioles seem a little too long...

Whatever it is, it really is a nice looking clone.

There aren't any natural hybrids between "venosa" and "purpurea" as they are the same species or if you include S. rosea into S. purpurea, the same subspecies.

Edited by Dave Evans

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice plant but its not a pure montana.Definately a hybrid with something else.What exactly...who knows

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Sign in to follow this