snapperhead51 Posted December 5, 2014 Report Share Posted December 5, 2014 Marcus , you actually got plant material from Hummer and u have that plant the same as Dimitar showed in the other threads and Jen form USA with the 9 cm pitcher ,you have that plant there now in AU ?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dimitar Posted December 6, 2014 Report Share Posted December 6, 2014 (edited) with the 9 cm pitcher In fact 10.1cm, not 9 cm. Don't eat 1.1 cm from the size of the pitcher hey... This Hummer's giant pitcher has reached its full potential and stands at 10.1cm or 4 inches. Marcus , you actually got plant material from Hummer and u have that plant the same as Dimitar showed in the other threads and Jen form USA with the 9 cm pitcher ,you have that plant there now in AU ?? Would it be possible MarcusB to trace them back to the particular plant described by John Hummer which in fact is the real HG cultivar? ? Edited December 6, 2014 by dimitar 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobile Posted December 6, 2014 Report Share Posted December 6, 2014 Marcus , you actually got plant material from Hummer and u have that plant the same as Dimitar showed in the other threads and Jen form USA with the 9 cm pitcher ,you have that plant there now in AU ?? John, are you saying that John Hummer send material back to AU? If not then Marcus cannot have 'Hummer's Giant' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobile Posted December 6, 2014 Report Share Posted December 6, 2014 Marcus , you actually got plant material from Hummer and u have that plant the same as Dimitar showed in the other threads and Jen form USA with the 9 cm pitcher ,you have that plant there now in AU ?? John, are you saying that John Hummer send material back to AU? If not then Marcus cannot have 'Hummer's Giant' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FredG Posted December 6, 2014 Report Share Posted December 6, 2014 Hello? The real Hummer's Giant is the clone described by John Hummer and registered as a cultivar in 2000. This green thing does not match the description or the photograph that goes with the description therefore it isn't Hummer's Giant. Charles' account is so full of errors and so vague that it must be discounted. It may have come from John Hummer and it may also be part of the consignment that he received in 1986 but as it does not conform to the description it isn't the clone that was registered. if you then decide that the registration description doesn't matter ( already muted in a post ) as it's a Cephalotus then what is the point of registering any plant of this genus at all? What it is is a Cephalotus that is capable of producing large pitchers and for some an attractive one. Perhaps we should be appreciating the plant and not the label? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
corky Posted December 6, 2014 Report Share Posted December 6, 2014 Sounds to me that hummers giant is lost in cultivation and pokies green thing as Fred puts it should be named if desired and people need to keep proper records(pretty obvious )I have one of presidents hummers giants but I brought the plant because I really liked the clone and it could of been called "bob" and I would of still purchased it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dimitar Posted December 6, 2014 Report Share Posted December 6, 2014 The real question that should be asked in this vicious circle is: does John Hummer have more pictures of the particular plant he described as Hummer Giant? Charles, can u help for this, please? That blurry pic used in the cultivar description is just bullshit and doesn't help at all.. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobile Posted December 6, 2014 Report Share Posted December 6, 2014 Fred, many clones and cultivars do not match the description in all growing conditions, even when they are genuine, so called dark clones being good examples. The plant in my avatar is your "Big Boy", but the pitchers are not big due to the conditions I grew it in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FredG Posted December 6, 2014 Report Share Posted December 6, 2014 Carl, do the growing conditions also change the shape and characteristics of the pitcher? You are trying to paint a target around the arrow. You have no credible evidence of a link to Hummer's Giant so you have to go to the description. This plant fails that test. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobile Posted December 6, 2014 Report Share Posted December 6, 2014 Carl, do the growing conditions also change the shape and characteristics of the pitcher? Fred, I don't know. Can you provide me with the published description of "Big Boy", so that I can check my plant against it? I am trying to seek other credible explanations of why 'Hummer's Giant' do not all match the cultivar description, rather than dismissing it out of hand as being fake. I agree that a cultivar should match the description, but you know as well as I do that they often don't, even when the plant is genuine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FredG Posted December 6, 2014 Report Share Posted December 6, 2014 Fred, I don't know. Can you provide me with the published description of "Big Boy", so that I can check my plant against it? Nice one Carl, I appreciate a touch of facetiousness too. A very credible answer to why examples of Hummer's Giant do not match the cultivar description is because they're not the cultivar. It may very well be that Charles' plant was the real deal and after 14 years John Hummer published and registered a photo of the wrong clone. which would mean that Charles' plant would no longer be a Hummer's Giant. I have asked more than once if we could have a credible account from Charles' and it hasn't been forthcoming. So we are left with only the cultivar description and this plant does not meet it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobile Posted December 6, 2014 Report Share Posted December 6, 2014 Nice one Carl, I appreciate a touch of facetiousness too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snapperhead51 Posted December 7, 2014 Report Share Posted December 7, 2014 Carl just trying to See if Marcus B , had a HG plant / material sent to him from USA , nothing more ,in the time frame from Reg to present day, or some where in-between , as just would like to see it to see what differences if any are here in AU . I have to say , like Fred the original description to me , dont match the present day HG ,,have persistent this many times but all ways got shot down for it, IMO they dont match up from original registration photo & description to now big 10cm green monster ! which is so impressive have to say . only my opinion ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobile Posted December 7, 2014 Report Share Posted December 7, 2014 At least Charles can trace his plants back to John Hummer, more than most can. Irrespective of what the 'green thing' is, its pitcher size is extremely impressive and if stable deserves recognition. The whole Cephalotus thing is a total mess. A combination of poor cultivar descriptions, lack of detail descriptions for many unregistered clones, unique characteristics being so minor making them almost indistinguishable, exaggeration or misrepresentation of characteristics, characteristics being subject to very specific conditions, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dimitar Posted December 7, 2014 Report Share Posted December 7, 2014 John & Fred, your statements guys are based on what evidence? Do u both have genuine Hummers Giant with trace back to John Hummer which matches the cultivar description, so u can make those conclusions ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snapperhead51 Posted December 7, 2014 Report Share Posted December 7, 2014 can we have the original registration paper up and photo posted ,any one have it to put up ? the original photo if possible now Dimi you know we can that that pant here , dew to our fantastic gov regulations that help all AU be free from diseases, except when large company's bring in equipment in that spread all sorts of invasive plant material around , that quite legal its seems very double standard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobile Posted December 7, 2014 Report Share Posted December 7, 2014 http://www.carnivorousplants.org/cpn/Species/v29n4p116_122.html#hummers The picture is very poor, so how anyone can draw any conclusions based on it is beyond me. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dimitar Posted December 7, 2014 Report Share Posted December 7, 2014 can we have the original registration paper up and photo posted ,any one have it to put up ? the original photo if possible Done as ordered :) now Dimi you know we can that that pant here , dew to our fantastic gov regulations that help all AU be free from diseases, except when large company's bring in equipment in that spread all sorts of invasive plant material around , that quite legal its seems very double standard. He he he nice one mate :) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dimitar Posted December 7, 2014 Report Share Posted December 7, 2014 That plant match perfectly the cultivar description in shape of the pitchers and the color The pic belongs to Charles Brewer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snapperhead51 Posted December 7, 2014 Report Share Posted December 7, 2014 so just as an observation , the pitcher in the Reg paper John states is stable and pitchers are usually 6 to 7cm with some getting to 8 , but its seems to been may be different to the plants being sold now , as impressive as they are and I want one !! would one agree or not ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FredG Posted December 7, 2014 Report Share Posted December 7, 2014 At least Charles can trace his plants back to John Hummer, more than most can. Irrespective of what the 'green thing' is, its pitcher size is extremely impressive and if stable deserves recognition. Could you please slow down a bit Carl. Charles has reported he bought many plants from John Hummer at various times. I'm willing to bet he's also received many plants from other sources too. From his narrative it doesn't appear that his records are that accurate to definitely say the green thing was one of the ones from Hummer. ( Again I ask for an as accurate account as he can give.) His main stance appears to be it's an HG because it has the capability to produce big pitchers. To go back to your wonderful piece of facetiousness. Why should I bother to spend time ( and money) writing a detailed description, taking cracking photographs and getting it all published if in the end you're going to ignore it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobile Posted December 7, 2014 Report Share Posted December 7, 2014 John, surely pitcher size is a function of conditions. If I remember correctly, doesn't pokie grow her plant under low light, low temperature conditions? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobile Posted December 7, 2014 Report Share Posted December 7, 2014 To go back to your wonderful piece of facetiousness. Why should I bother to spend time ( and money) writing a detailed description, taking cracking photographs and getting it all published if in the end you're going to ignore it. The point is I wouldn’t ignore it. If the details and photos were concise enough to allow identification without reasonable doubt then it would serve to help positively identify it. There is a very reasonable chance that I have a genuine "Big Boy", as I have the recorded trail back to you from the seller, so it would be at least interesting to see if it matches up to a detailed description from the originator Is the money element a function of your time? If you do not intend registering it then the detailed description could be digitally published, without cost to you. I'm sure I could get it hosted for free on the internet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dimitar Posted December 7, 2014 Report Share Posted December 7, 2014 I'm willing to bet he's also received many plants from other sources too. I tend to agree with u Fred. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pokie22 Posted December 7, 2014 Report Share Posted December 7, 2014 (edited) so just as an observation , the pitcher in the Reg paper John states is stable and pitchers are usually 6 to 7cm with some getting to 8 , but its seems to been may be different to the plants being sold now , as impressive as they are and I want one !! would one agree or not ? No, I would bet that they are the same plants. Many people have purchased Hummer's giant over the years from Charles, and I am definitely not the first, nor will I be the last. I have 5 HG plants from Charles. However, only those under optimal conditions - happy plants - will achieve larger than normal pitchers or very robust growth. I have the luxury of growing plants under different conditions to test out growing parameters. The Hummer's giant plant I show is one plant under the best conditions I have found so far. The plants will tell you when they are not happy but I need not tell others this, as I am considered a novice grower by your standards. Simply having good genetics and god's good graces is not sufficient. As with all things, empiricism wins in the end. Instead of conjecture about this topic, some due diligence is in order. A cursory search will show that many fail to reach the 8cm mark, even when they have the real deal, and why is that? Edited December 7, 2014 by pokie22 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.