Jump to content

Standard of Sarracenia ID


Guest partisangardener
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest partisangardener

Since last year I grow sarracenia clones (sometimes from a specified place) from selfed seeds. That these plants should be marked as such is clear to me. But on the way to find out what the mother plant looks like I found out, that there are different codes for the same clone.

For example this flava F49 flava var. rubricorpora very dark. Don Schnell =darkred/black Potterton & Martin (JA) M.K.F124 M.K. 2009/10

has the first fat number by Plantev and the last one by Mike King

Is there no standard?

Could someone please explain me how it works? When everybody makes a new code does it make sense to keep track of the genealogy of a plant?

The letters are for species, subspecies and maybe form. This fits always but the numbers....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest partisangardener

Would it be a good idea to start one now, a bit late I know, but worthwile I think.

For a start a none optional addition to this codes with the growers I.D. like M.K. for Mike King (Some do it allready). But without these codes are worthless.

Of course only for non hybrids (human origin) for conservational reasons. I myself would not mind taking Mikes code as a standard like

IS SS F104 Pl F49 M.K.F104.

But I think there is much more knowledge here in the forum to suggest somebody’s standard Mike for example will know who’s is most complete.

IS for i standard ss for selfed seed F.flava

and of course with a sample from the standard man for genetical proof put down somwhere.

Edited by partisangardener
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As Matin said this has been suggested before.

The reason it falls down is, If you say start with Mike Kings codes,What happens when he gets a new plant grown by someone else and gives it his code number.

Does the original grower have to change his code just to fit in with Mikes so everyone knows which plant it is?

You will find most growers put multiple codes after their plants so they know the origin right back to the originator.

ada

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest partisangardener

If there wood be a standard this presumed grower wood have to add this code.

So why not add Mikes code to the beginning? It would increase the worth of a plant :) especially when several good photos of each such clone (including a flower)could be looked up here. Its not a must, but I think If someone starts this job it soon will catch on. And of course if possible there should be the whole available story of the clone noted. Especially the original grower including his breeding code.

The codes of the plants tend to get too long for a sticker if I have to write all the numbers and events down.

It wood be more easy to check what I have got. With this site http://cpphotofinder.com/, a remarkable work, I only miss any numbers (apart from a few) of sarracenias. With other species like Dionaea its different (much less work I suppose)

It must not be Mikes numbers, but to have a start this would be a chance if he is willing. If data is to be found at a central place the possibility of an international standard might become a reality. After some time every serious grower will want to be in this standard.

If we start with the species who knows what will come of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If all plants originated from just person, then a standard code would be possible - but they don't.

Also, no one (not even Mike) does or could, own every single plant that is being grow (let alone those still to be produced) - so you can't have just one code. Last year I potted up over 2000 seedlings - there is no way they could all be fitted into anyones existing code system (and that is just mine). Most (but not all) people do add a Mike King code to their plants (if it has one) when being sold.

The main thing, is for people to make sure they do record any codes that originally come with their plants and pass them on.

But at least John has put in the work and produced that Deconfusifier, posted above. This is the best you are ever going to get.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see the point of codes unless you have a massive collection.

Just label them with the code of the person you bought it from. Most of the time it's Mike's code because he has the biggest collection!

Not everyone buys all their plants from Mike!

Keeping other peoples codes is all well & good - untill you end up with 3 totally different plants with the code F5 (or whatever). Or when you buy/produce seedlings - so you have to give them codes if they don't have any (otherwise no one will know anything about them, when you start to spread them around), then later on you buy another plant with the same code as yours - do you change all your codes again or just give the new plant a new code for your system. This is why most people end up using their own code systems - not 'for the sake of it', but out of neccesity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Using someone else's numbering system is impossible, Mike does not have every plant that I have, at least not in his published list, and his descriptions don't always match the description of similar plants bought from someone else, so how could you apply Mike's numbers to a plant you got from another grower. You'd end up with false numbered plants being sold and total confusion. If you bought a leucophylla x oreophila could you look at Mike's grow list and apply a number, no you couldn't because there are lots of different crosses between the two.

Using your own numbering system helps you to organise a large collection, and if you start producing your own seed it is far easier to record on a label that you've crossed L18 with F97 rather than marking it up in full and then confusing two plants with similar names or locations.

If you grow from seed you must must must record that he plant is seed grown, even if selfed, you will probably get a variety of clones produced from a single set of seeds, they may be very interesting plants but probably not quite the original. Take a look at a photograph of a field of wild grown plants and see how many identical plants you can spot.

If you buy from a reputable, renowned grower, like Mike or Cedric or many others on this forum, keep a record of their plant number, it may help you to sell divisions in a couple of years time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest partisangardener

A mixture out of the two sites http://cpphotofinder.com/ and http://www.johnjearrard.co.uk/plants/sarra...er-explain.html

would be best. And there is no need for conservation reasons, to include the horticultural crosses.

To pin these above two sites at the top of the sarracenias pitcher plants would help a lot. And maybe we get that way at the deconfusifier site more pictures of the species and less Chicken or no picture. Both are members I understand.

A lot of wrong labelled Sarras would cease to carry their wrong label.:) When a plant ceases to be in Mikes or somebody else’s grow list, is it up to this time wrong labelled, if this clone was sold before many times from him?

If we have good pictures of all stages and growing conditions we could at least keep the relative few cultivars from the wild with origin (place and so on) away from all this criss cross happening everywhere.

I think there are not so many growers who love to do something for the species and a lot less for reason of having no chance.

If we establish a list of reliable cultivars (Mikes wouldn’t be to bad for a start:)) of the most trusted growers (Same Number with growers code wouldn’t be bothering if the pictures are included and the growers ID) We would increase the number of growers with good documented cultivars.

It wouldn’t help the species at all, if there is always a different Number from each grower of the same clone in addition to all the seedlings selfed or not and the millennia of wrong ones too.

All the cultivars which can’t make it to the list would be good enough for the ones who just like a beautiful plant.

We could make even a first rate list for the very reliable clones

a second rate for the ones still in doubt.

Shouldn’t be too difficult if some reliable growers just start it. The rest will follow or not, who cares then, if we can have good documented clones.

It’s not as big as Wiki and this was not accepted by most at the beginning, look where it is now.

Lets pin up these two sites above and we will see what happens. It took me a week to find it.

I wouldnt mix up selfed seeds with clones. We already have totoal confusion it would be lessened a bit.

Edited by partisangardener
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest partisangardener

Just to check if a plant with an ID with place clone and everything to be possible true. There are because of this nonexistent system a lot of mislabelled plants about. If the same clone after being sold may have 10, 20 or more ID numbers nobody will keep track. Eventually it will be lost.

This is my second attempt to grow CPs. The last one is some 20 years gone. Few plants where then in Germany available and none with an ID at this time

If we would have for example a hundred clones of each species (maybe even subspecies) well documented to look up everybody really interested could get some true plants.

I am not talking about every clone which is impossible.

But if there is a slight chance to preserve something for the future. We will fail if nobody starts it. And it should be found easy pinned up as important topic. If there is such a place in the net to be found pin that up or tell here. This will be a project worth joining.

We are not forever and there are a lot of clones already lost.......... lets keep track. These easy to be tracked clones will have a longer life.

I believe a forum like this would be a place to do it.

Edited by partisangardener
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What precisely is the problem you are trying to fix?

I too am wondering what the problem is?

BTW, all plants are clones. Perhaps they are not select clones, but no matter the source, all plants are clones, vegetatively propagated plants are often identical clones (though even then they may be individual unique clones).

Edited by Joseph Clemens
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And maybe we get that way at the deconfusifier site more pictures of the species and less Chicken or no picture.

I am working on more pictures and less chicken!

The latest update to the deconfusifier is well underway. I have almost finished adding the new pictures - some of the updated pages are already available, and then I will start adding the new clone numbers for the year. It is an ongoing process, but hopefully it improves year by year.

There are a number of important growers in the UK whose collections are poorly recorded in the deconfusifier and I regret that. I add information and pictures as fast as I am able.

I would like to thank all of those growers who have allowed me into their collections and put up with me as I spend hour after hour taking photographs. I really do appreciate their generosity and tolerance as I grunt and squint and fart in their greenhouses through the summer!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am working on more pictures and less chicken!

The latest update to the deconfusifier is well underway. I have almost finished adding the new pictures - some of the updated pages are already available, and then I will start adding the new clone numbers for the year. It is an ongoing process, but hopefully it improves year by year.

There are a number of important growers in the UK whose collections are poorly recorded in the deconfusifier and I regret that. I add information and pictures as fast as I am able.

I would like to thank all of those growers who have allowed me into their collections and put up with me as I spend hour after hour taking photographs. I really do appreciate their generosity and tolerance as I grunt and squint and fart in their greenhouses through the summer!

I not understand why this need for,i think there is more then one clone from every specie out off the wild ,some off the first plants become meaby from wildseeds ,this are not the same clones but she are coming from the same place,numbering mains notting ,it s only for the colector .The only thing that is important is when you buy a plant whit a locality place ,this must be the riht whatever how she looks.

This can only happened when every seller set the riht name and place by his plants,not numbers.It s a question off honesty and not mix plants up,therefor a collector have a numbering system ,for not mix up things.

Iff you want a stabel and trustfull numbering then you must do this like lithops,this is the only genus i know that growers accept whit only Cole numbers,this plants looks not all the same from the same locality ,she came all from seeds and have very differences,but whit this you are sure she are locality plants ,and that is the only that matter,give number only by a fieldresearcher and a bookwritter not from any seller!But i think it s to late for CP to do this ,and you must find some one that will do this and be accepted from all growers.

This is only my opinion and i can be very wrong,i hope you not misunderstand my poor Englisch sorry for this,

Cheers Will

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest partisangardener

I appreciate John Jearrards labour very much. It helps growers like me and thousand others which have not the sources like Mike and all the other very expert growers to have idealistic people like you. And I hope there will be some day a number of clones on your site in all growing stages and conditions. The start is very promising. I hope such a project pinned up here would help you to increase your access, or even some of the very prominent collectors share some pictures of their clones at your site. And I hope nothing happens to you and your site, like age and the bad casualties of life or second best, a lot of qualified people will help you to maintain your site. Many sites have been already destroyed. At least for clones from these sites and the ones being destroyed soon, there should be a site like I would like to find here.

I hope most readers who read so far know that selfed seeds are no clones only a chance to get a hint about former hybridisation and of propagating some of the genetic material of a plant without crossing it with a plant of uncertain lineage. There is of course always a loss and even true clones may have mutants or become virused. If we have established a working site we could even add some pictures of selfed seeds that everybody may judge by himself. And before someone mentions it, there are natural hybrids no doubt about this.

If everybody would be honest, reliable and would keep the maximum standard as some do, there would indeed be no need for such a project.

But I fear, that’s not the world I am living in.

Please excuse my maybe rough manners and English

I want a chance for the ordinary growers to attain some knowledge and to get access to plants of known heritage with the chance to verify it, before he starts breeding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

people must also understand that plants (vegative clones) and seed grown clones can look very different under some one else's growing conditions.

I know,i have seen John taking many pictures,some of plants i have grown from seed and they look totally different plants

under my conditions.

This could lead to disappointment or people thinking they have been sold the wrong plant even if it came from the original grower.

ada.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest partisangardener

So it would be good to mention the growing conditions of the plants pictured. Especially if they differ from the usual used ones apart from light which everybody should know and I would not include pictures of plants under poor conditions.

Do you want to tell that clones from your seedlings sold to John look very much different, to the very same ones you still have?

I know that they differ usually in some years and of course with age. But this could be mentioned on this site and with more pictures become better.

People which don’t want to read, will be always disappointed. :)

Edited by partisangardener
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think i not understand this riht,i not understand all words you are written,but it s seems to me very confused and meaby for everyone!

Fieldresearchers seen meaby thuisand plants on one location,what she are taking whit ,you think ?not plants that looks ordinairy,she take the most beautyfull,the most white or the most special plants and bring this in cultivation.When you go cultivate this from seeds then you have a lot different looking plants.

Self polinated seedlings from a location are still the riht plants from this location ,she meaby looks all different but she are still the riht ones,i think you not talking abouth cultivars or crossings,in this case there is no other plant for polination and you have for 100% the riht locality.The same when you cross 2 plants from the same location ,all this seedlings are the riht however she looks difference.

You can not take pitchers from a few plants and say so must the plants looks,in nature she looks all different.When you buy a plant from a location and this is not looking like a Mike King clone then its not the riht ?Is this what you are taking abouth,or have i understand this wrong?Give numbers to plants ,it s go not work,give numbers to a locality place ,this go work for sure.

What i try to say is ,there is no standardform for locality plants or plants in the wild,meaby she can have some locality difference but thats all,this are not cultivars or crossings.

I see never this plants in the wild but when i see pictures from wildplants then you can see that not one plant looks te same like another,so go you take pics off them all?

I think it s not the plants that are difficult ,i think the are the growers tath makes things more and more difficult and confused,so difficult that some time in future no one know what he is cultivate,

Cheers Will

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So it would be good to mention the growing conditions of the plants pictured. Especially if they differ from the usual used ones apart from light which everybody should know and I would not include pictures of plants under poor conditions.

Do you want to tell that clones from your seedlings sold to John look very much different, to the very same ones you still have?

I know that they differ usually in some years and of course with age. But this could be mentioned on this site and with more pictures become better.

People which don’t want to read, will be always disappointed. :)

John has some plants from me that are grown from wild collected seeds,and he has some that i have divided,only the ones i have divided for him are the same as mine.The wild collected seed ones are unique,as i don't have the room to grow them all to maturity(john does have room)

What i mean is i have sent plants to a friend(aidan) to grow in his conditions because he has probably more sunshine in the average year and a warmer growing area.Under these conditions even highly coloured plants are better coloured and one in particular has turned out to have inverse veination,something not seen before in this plant(manky)and a few people grow it now.

Bob's site and john's are very good to give you an idea of what a plant can or should look like,but if you want the real plants you must get them from a good source and someone you trust.All the serious sarra growers i know or deal with keep very good records and all you have to do is ask where they got their plants from,you will find out that most of them can be traced back to a handful of people.Mike even tidyied up his list a few years ago because of all the duplicate plants from different sources.

ada

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest partisangardener

Will9 I think you misunderstood me. I don’t want a picture from every plant in the wild.

What I would like is, from as many as possible cultivars out of the wild a serial of each plant with different stages including flower and of course some differences under different growing conditions including all the important story about it.

This wouldn’t express an opinion about all the other plants whether they are right or mislabelled. This is for the experts.

But every plant on this site will be defined and if somebody will start anew breeding plants from a certain place he will have a good chance to get some true labelled plants from this special place for a start.

Maybe this place is gone as many are, and maybe we will find someday better methods to judge, but just to start with some cultivars from the wild would be a good thing for the future. This site will grow in time and I think any effort won’t be wasted.

The mentioned doublet’s Mike had shows that the existing system does not work very well at the moment. Some plants of a clone might degrade with most growers and if we keep track more easily, we will have more chances for each clone to survive.

I repeat not every cultivar, but as many as possible. If it’s only a dozen good documented it’s a start.

Edited by partisangardener
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will9 I think you misunderstood me. I don’t want a picture from every plant in the wild.

What I would like is, from as many as possible cultivars out of the wild a serial of each plant with different stages including flower and of course some differences under different growing conditions including all the important story about it.

This wouldn’t express an opinion about all the other plants whether they are right or mislabelled. This is for the experts.

But every plant on this site will be defined and if somebody will start anew breeding plants from a certain place he will have a good chance to get some true labelled plants from this special place for a start.

Maybe this place is gone as many are, and maybe we will find someday better methods to judge, but just to start with some cultivars from the wild would be a good thing for the future. This site will grow in time and I think any effort won’t be wasted.

The mentioned doublet’s Mike had shows that the existing system does not work very well at the moment. Some plants of a clone might degrade with most growers and if we keep track more easily, we will have more chances for each clone to survive.

I repeat not every cultivar, but as many as possible. If it’s only a dozen good documented it’s a start.

Hi thanks ,i misunderstand indeed iff you talk abbouth cultivars,cultivars are something very different then plants from one location,every location have some thing different to another

but these special marks came allways back from seeds ,seedlings can looks very different but have allways these marks,this plants are not cultivars .A cultivar is 1 very special looking plant!!!Make in nature or by human,it s only a cultivar when it s registred and then you can only cultivate this whit offsets.

I think it s a good thing this special marks from every locality set on picture,but only when she have these marks,some locality place plants can looks te same like other localitys.

Like mention above ,you are only sure when you have the riht locality when you buy seeds or plants from trustfull people that take the hobby very important.

I know there are locality places dissapear,but who can tell iff you are dealing whit the riht plants when this is dissapear?I think only when you are sure the plants or the seeds came from there then you can looking for the special mark for these place and mention this or take a picture,but plants can be very different iff she came from seeds and you can only tell on the special marks that came allways back iff she are not crossed whit another llocality.

I see many times crossed locality places on seedlists and on growlists ,these are wrong named ,when you cross two different localitys from flava ,what you have then is only flava and not flava locality.... number ..x flava locality....number.... but only flava,i not understud that growers whit locality plants cross these whit other localitys,after a while you have plants that show all the different marks and you never know when you have the real or a crossing.I think this is a schame,growers must trying to hold this special locality plants ,she are very special for reasson you mentioned ,iff this locality dissapear,

I have notting against cross plants ,but i not like this when growers go cross some locality plants from the same specie,like leuco x leuco and flava x flava,it s not make the plants better or more beautyfull.When growers collect locality plants ,please try to hold this pure,it s a botanical treassure.

Keep in mind,it s only my opinion and i respect also someones other opinions ,i think also it s very intresting what other people think abbouth this matter,i hope allways to learn something,

Cheers Will

Edited by will9
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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...