Jump to content

Pinguicula apuana


Kevin Tonnerre

Recommended Posts

Err, not knowing about this location, I was going to say it just looks like a P. vulgaris... What is the other parent?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The hybrid-theory has yet to be proven via DNA analysis and artificial crossings. I am still not entirely convinced, since P. apuana doesnt look exactly like a crossing of these two parent specimens, in my opinion. Yet, i am open to this thesis and i hope we will find an answer in near future.

The high variability of P. apuana is quite impressive, tough. I hope i can get some seed of this clone and will see how the next generation looks like, with maybe some more "typical" ones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am still not entirely convinced, since P. apuana doesnt look exactly like a crossing of these two parent specimens, in my opinion.

You have to take into acount introgression of both the parents into the hybrid swarm. Only the F1 generation will be exactly inbetween both parents. F2 and more generations will show plants closer to one parent or the other.

The second thing is that most of P. apuana populations are growing at higher altitudes, where the true P. vulgaris also happens. That is to say P. apuana is influence by only one of its parents with backcrosses. Then P. apuana tends to be closer to P. vulgaris than to P. mariae. On the contrary, in a few stations where P. apuana meets P. mariae, here you can find P. apuana specimens closer to P. mariae than to P. vulgaris.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The hybrid-theory has yet to be proven via DNA analysis and artificial crossings.

The species hypothesis of P.apuana also needs to be further investigated. This is a complicated one for sure and I think all options are still open for (much) debate. DNA will certainly play a critical role in teasing this mystery apart, but at the moment there's simply not enough data to decisively decide for either the species or hybrid hypothesis.

Best wishes,

Fernando Rivadavia

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 1 month later...

No problem for Pinguicula hirtiflora, this is a true species.

Then it is problematic for P. apuana. Should we called P. apuana only the F1 hybrids or any plant that is not a true P. vulgaris or P. mariae? In fact, the name P. apuana has been given to a bench of populations that surely contain F1, F2, F3... hybrids. So that I think a seedling from P. apuana can also be called P. apuana. But as there seems to be a morphological continuum between P. vulgaris and P. apuana, the real problem is to put a clear limit between both species, and you can expect to have borderline plants from a seedling of P. apuana. A complicated case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No problem for Pinguicula hirtiflora, this is a true species.

Aymeric, as well as P. histiflora is a true species? I always thought she was a subspecies of P. crystallina. Now I'm confused :blink: !

Best regards,

Rodrigo

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.

×
×
  • Create New...