Jump to content

Eden Black Pictures


CephFan

Recommended Posts

But surely this is the case with all Cephalotus? To achieve dark colouration, certain conditions need to be met.

Yes an NO.

 

Yes certain conditions will bring out either the colour or the size of any particular Ceph.

But genetics determines whether a particular clone is more or less predisposed to produce larger pitchers than 'normal' or darker/redder pitchers than normal.

 

So, if just one of your plants is grown in high light levels, it will have darker pitchers than the others.

A plant at the end of winter, may have darker pitchers when compared to one in summer.

A plant grown in shade, may have larger pitchers when compared to others grown in full sun.

 

But.

Plants which are genetically darker, will be darker than the 'normal' Cephs when grown under the same conditions and compared at the same time of year.

Same with clones which are genetically larger.

 

So yes, growing conditions plays it's part. But so does genetics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Phil, yes I understand that given conditions conducive to the formation of the characteristics, a cultivar that is predisposed may take on a darker colouration to one that is not. However, it is apparent that some may well expect a cultivar to take on the characteristics in conditions where a 'typical' would not. I guess at least this thread has hopefully highlighted that this is not necessarily the case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic has gone on and on. It's quite interesting though.

Lets just hope that Stephen does not take his ball away with him, never to return. It would be a real shame as he always, in the past, has had good things to say.

Me, personally, am just looking for people that can tell me how to grow the damn things well, I still haven't got the hang of Cephs completely.

 

I wouldn't like to see anyone leave just because of a thread. As I said earlier, the purpose of a forum is to debate and sometimes people get very passionate on a subject which is close to their heart. Everyones opinion is valid and it is worthy of further discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally for me it would appear that worthy Cephalotus clones are those which have and keeps unique pitcher shapes than the color or the size of the pitchers. The shape of the pitchers is more likely to be stable than the coloration or the size of the pitchers. It seems the coloration or the size of the pitchers are far too dependant on many other conditions.

 

I have a strong strong impression of two clones so far:

- A USA clone  Cephalotus " Squat "

-  Cephalotus "Eden Black x self " - a selected seed grown plant called by Italian grower and circulating under the name Cephalotus " Bananito"

 

1622684_10202514993069649_934916710_n.jp

 

971566_10201930446936361_115729279_n.jpg

Edited by dimitar
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Phil, yes I understand that given conditions conducive to the formation of the characteristics, a cultivar that is predisposed may take on a darker colouration to one that is not. However, it is apparent that some may well expect a cultivar to take on the characteristics in conditions where a 'typical' would not.

Carl - my replies have been more to the question, rather than directly to you. So that other who might ask the question, but don't have your knowledge, might understand more.

 

But in relation to this, I'd say that is also down to the individual clone.

Some might be more inclined to show colour under less than 'perfect' conditions and so 'appear' to be dark clones, but show no difference when grown with others under 'perfect' conditions.

Whilst another may seem ordinary under less than perfect conditions and show their true potential only under 'perfect' conditions.

 

One will be best for some people, whilst the other one is for different people.

 

The variables of Genetics and their interactions with climate and soils, is all part of the JOY and Frustration of growing plants.

 

 

I wouldn't like to see anyone leave just because of a thread. As I said earlier, the purpose of a forum is to debate and sometimes people get very passionate on a subject which is close to their heart. Everyones opinion is valid and it is worthy of further discussion.

AGREED!

Edited by Phil Green
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dimitar - good to see you are still here.

 

One of the issues is that people like to collect. With something like Cephalotus, there is only one species, all of which are almost identical in the wild.

So to fulfil that collecting habit, people look for the smallest of differences, no matter how insignificant (or real sometimes).

 

Also, the growing from seed isn't that long an established norm for Cephs. So there has been little time to select and breed for 'real' noticeable difference.

As we are increasingly growing from seed and selfing plants (some of which were already the offspring of selfing), so 'mutations' may increasingly occur.

 

I agree about this  "Bananito", it is a fantastic shape change and one I'd like to get. It may even lead to other shape changes when bred from.

 

But lets not forget (sort of back on topic), it sprang from a selfed Eden Black - without Eden Black, this would not exist.

 

Whilst pitcher shape 'may' (or not) be stable in Cephs, regardless of conditions. This is not true for all CP's - Heliamphora shape is extremely dependent on the amount of light they receive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Carl - my replies have been more to the question, rather than directly to you. So that other who might ask the question, but don't have your knowledge, might understand more.

 

As were some of my questions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm willing to bet the differences in color on the EBs are more ph related than anything else. Lower ph=more color ime.

Unlikely.

But I'm willing to accept that bet (I always like a sure thing :nyam1: )

 

I'm not saying PH doesn't make a difference.

But Stephen grew this with many other Cephalotus for many years. I seriously doubt he was always growing just this one in a lower PH medium.

 

For someone growing just one plant, then PH might affect the colour they get of their ONE plant. But for someone growing many, it isn't going to affect just one plant over a decade or more.

Edited by Phil Green
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Phil I didnt mean the difference in color in stephens EB verses his other plants. I meant the reason different growers with the same clone have different colors. Not a long shot to surmise different growers have different ph levels.

Ah, OK. Thanks for clearing that up, it didn't come across in your first post.

 

Yeh, that is another of the many possible specific reasons (with in just 'the potting medium'), while a plant would grow differently for different people.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dimi

That's one of erios correct? Has he taken leaf cuttings to get the same shape??

 

Matt,

 

yes he did it and it starts shows the same shape as u can see bellow.

He gave me a plant from that clone and  I will give  to a friend in UK as soon as I have spare. We will see in the future how that clone will develop...

 

1902983_10202409729158117_1190311395_n.j

 

 

 

 

 

But lets not forget (sort of back on topic), it sprang from a selfed Eden Black - without Eden Black, this would not exist.

 

 

 

Yes that is true Phil and nobody denies that fact.

Edited by dimitar
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A lot have been said since I was here the last time. Although, I was following new posts through my e-mail. I was very much personally explained a lot in meanwhile about registration and cultivars. I clearly understand the situation of those matters now. In very short, what was already said... registration is in general a "name reservation", generally with some description added to that. Because there are no rules about the plant and its features itself, well the final effect does not need to be explained.

 

But what is much more important in my opinion and was missed, probably because of the amount I tend to write... So I will emphasize that here again and try to make it short as I can.

 

Vegetative propagation is NOT perfect way of making another plant a totally identical clone of the previous one. In that process we make a copy of an original. But even each copy can be slightly different. Some might even be enough different, to be easily distinguished, great most, not, but the difference can already be in genes and waiting to appear. Than we have a COPY, which is not exact and what we do next... we make another copy of it. Now we have a second line of propagated plants. These might differ slightly from the mother plant (a copy), and a lot from the original.

 

Now depending on the genetic stability and mutation potency of a feature we have selected with the Original plant. Every each copy and further copies, might have different genoptype and phenotype. And THAT might be also one of the explanations why some might not have EB as the original, or not even close to its first copies. In the copying process something went wrong but we tend to think it is s perfect way of making an identical plant. WRONG. :) It is definitely a good one, but very much dependent on the feature genetics, which lets be honest, no one will test properly.

 

Of course I skipped everything else, that if can, will have further influence on a plant. If to imperfect copying method we than add influence of growing conditions (which are great on Cephalotus), than we have all the colours of the rainbow. ;-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree with the vegative propagation bit.there are simply not enough people taking cuttings cross pollinating sharing plants ect for the small genetic changes to be making a huge difference

I work in a nursery that specialises in dahlia's and chrysanthemums we take 10,000 + cuttings a year and they are 99.9% true to form

How many people out there grow cephalotus under artificial lights?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Just a technicallity, but what is actually being registered is the cultivar NAME, not the cultivar itself. The cultivar itself is described in whatever journal or book is chosen, but there is no registration of said cultivar involved. The idea about registration of the name is to prevent two plants having the same name, not to work out how unique they are.

 

This small bit in Marcel's answer was very informative for me.  I didn't know it before that the registration is only to prevent 2 plants having the same name.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree 100%  with Pulsar on this.

 

Cephalotus - in theory what you say about genetic drift may be true. But in reality the likelihood is very small and not great enough to worry about.

Plus, what other way is there to make an exact copy of a plant!

Seed - No

TC - this is even more likely to cause genetic mutations.

 

Which leaves cuttings/root division/off shoots - ie, vegetative propagation.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi, 

 

I think pitcher shape it is definitely something that should be maintained across different growing conditions. Bananito looks promising. But like Dimitar says, Squat has very distinctive shape of the pitcher that I have not seen in other plants. I feel squat could be identified in a blind line up. I have squat so I am sharing some photos of it, also there is one photo where you can see a comparison of the Squat and a new plant that Mat Soper selected based on the pitcher size and fast growth (he  grew it from seed), he calls it Hulk, and he had it on sale as Big Trap in his nursery.  

 

Anyway, the squat is stable, it has been propagated by leaves etc, and the pitchers are always that shape, even when they form as you can see in the pictures they look different shape.  

 

Anyway here are the pictures for the jury. 

 

Cephalotus Squat'

Squat

 

Cephalotus Squat

Squat

 

Squat VS Hampshire Big trap

Squat vs Hulk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, in contrast to what pulsar have written I could give an example from my own experience, when from a totally regular Dionaea muscipula I propagated by a leaf cutting a form with constantly erected leafs, which remained stable for another 8 years and about a 30 plants or so. When suddenly a backward mutation appeared and in a clump of such mutants, a regular one appeared from a division of the mutated form. :) I just wish I have made photos when they were still connected one to another. That would be a nice photo. :/

 

Plus, I am not denying dahlia vegetative propagation stability. But as there are lots of dahlia cuttings made and difference appear rarely, I made really a few cuttings of Dionaea muscipula myself and got a jackpot in that. So yeah. I think my "ideas" should at least be taken under consideration. We don't really know which species or genus is how much stable when subjected to vegetative propagation in a certain way. At least my own experience taught me to be a bit more careful in denying such influence in same clone differences. We also don't know how stable are our desired, selected features. They might be very stable and very unstable. If we just skip that, we might not understand some results.

 

I also consider that Banana formed Cephalotus as a good example as well. From self pollination of EB I have already seen about three now, very interesting looking seedlings. I think people sow many Cephalotus seeds and they don't show so spectacular results, or they don't share with them in public. Maybe EB is genetically fluent more than we think? I might be totally wrong, but I would not cross that out of my: to check list.

 

I can also give another interesting example, which caught my attention recently. It is about pale coloured Cephalotus German Giant. As I read the topic, I got more and more interested in ideas posted there. I seriously recommend to read it. Here is a link: http://www.insektenfang.com/ipforum/topic/5124-cephalotus-alba-clone/

 

I said what I wanted. My aim here is not to prove I am right. Which I even, can't. I just wanted show an opened doors, that some tend to think that are closed.

 

I do no negate, that vegetative propagation is the best way we have of making copies of plants we want to repeat some desired feature. But we should NOT treat it as ideal and compare different families, genus, species or even clones, like they should have same repeatability percentage.

Edited by Cephalotus
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vegetative propagation is NOT perfect way of making another plant a totally identical clone of the previous one. In that process we make a copy of an original. But even each copy can be slightly different. Some might even be enough different, to be easily distinguished, great most, not, but the difference can already be in genes and waiting to appear. Than we have a COPY, which is not exact and what we do next... we make another copy of it. Now we have a second line of propagated plants. These might differ slightly from the mother plant (a copy), and a lot from the original.

 

Now depending on the genetic stability and mutation potency of a feature we have selected with the Original plant. Every each copy and further copies, might have different genoptype and phenotype.

Interesting. I've heard anecdotes about how cuttings, etc, have grown differently from the mother plants, but are you saying that the genetic makeup is different between the two plants? Excuse my ignorance of the science, but how would growing a cutting lead to genetic change? Is there a theory about what's going on in such a situation? In TC I could understand some degree of genetic mutation appearing, but how would taking a cutting lead to this? Or is it more that certain "latent" genes are being "switched on" in the new clone or something?

I'm not trying to be confrontational or anything; I'm just curious about the science of it.

And sorry to stray off topic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting. I've heard anecdotes about how cuttings, etc, have grown differently from the mother plants, but are you saying that the genetic makeup is different between the two plants? Excuse my ignorance of the science, but how would growing a cutting lead to genetic change? Is there a theory about what's going on in such a situation? In TC I could understand some degree of genetic mutation appearing, but how would taking a cutting lead to this? Or is it more that certain "latent" genes are being "switched on" in the new clone or something?

I'm not trying to be confrontational or anything; I'm just curious about the science of it.

And sorry to stray off topic.

It is a long time since I last studied this so my info may be outdated, but anyway, the theory was that when plants form calluses, the rapid division of cells into the undifferentiated mass results in a greater likelihood of copying errors.  Thus when the cells start to differentiate the resulting growth will not always be identical to the source plant.

 

When you take a cutting of a leaf, a callus forms at the cut site.  This is the small bump of tissue at the base of the leaf from which the new stems grow.  It seems to form after the roots grow on ceph leaves, similar to what I have seen happen with leaf cuttings from other species.

 

You don’t normally get callus formation in root cuttings, or perhaps they are not as obvious (as I would expect there to be something similar), but certainly rhizome cuttings don’t form them as they are makings of a new stem.

 

Thus leaf cuttings, and possibly root cuttings, can result in minor genetic differences from the parent plant at a greater rate than is experienced in taking rhizome cuttings, and the resulting plants are far more likely to grow from the affected cells making the effect even greater.  However, we are talking about minor genetic changes, most of which will not impact the phenotype.

Edited by Marcus B
  • Like 1
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...