Sign in to follow this  
kisscool_38

Pinguicula reichenbachiana x vulgaris

Recommended Posts

for me a P.apuana  not an hybrid

jeff

 

Edited by jeff 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice plant, flower looks almost cobalt blue.

What is the difference between P. reichenbachiana and P. longifolia subsp. reichenbachiana?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no difference it is the same .

 

P.apuana 'in situ' in the alpes maritimes 2n=64

bend3.jpg

'in situ' in the alpi apuane 2n=64

apuana.jpg

where is the difference ?

jeff

 

Edited by jeff 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Zlotka said:

Nice plant, flower looks almost cobalt blue.

What is the difference between P. reichenbachiana and P. longifolia subsp. reichenbachiana?

In fact, it has slightly more violet flowers. It is a common problem on camera sensors.

Pinguicula reichenbachiana was first described as a distinct species, but Casper later placed it as subspecies of P. longifolia. It is now once again considered as a distinct species.

Pinguicula apuana certainly originates from hybridization between P. vulgaris and P. mariae, this last one closely related to P. reichenbachiana. This is why this hybrid has some affinities with P. apuana.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, kisscool_38 said:

In fact, it has slightly more violet flowers. It is a common problem on camera sensors.

Pinguicula reichenbachiana was first described as a distinct species, but Casper later placed it as subspecies of P. longifolia. It is now once again considered as a distinct species.

Pinguicula apuana certainly originates from hybridization between P. vulgaris and P. mariae, this last one closely related to P. reichenbachiana. This is why this hybrid has some affinities with P. apuana.

Thanks. It's clear now.

I have a P. longifolia from Zucarello, Italy. I thought this was a subsp. reichenbachiana but I'm not really sure now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Zlotka said:

Thanks. It's clear now.

I have a P. longifolia from Zucarello, Italy. I thought this was a subsp. reichenbachiana but I'm not really sure now.

Yes, plants from Zucarello are P. reichenbachiana.

Edited by kisscool_38
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bonjour

Do you have evidence of your claims ?

I do not see that on the last consensus tree,published, for apuana.

jeff

 

 

Edited by jeff 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you have evidences of yours?

The last tree (De Castro et al., 2016, for those who want to see it) clearly places this Pinguicula in subclade E1b along with P. reichenbachiana, while P. apuana is placed in subclade E1a with P. mariae. Is this in favour of your claim?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the caryotype  and the morphologicals caracters

For me botany is a whole, all the sciences must be joined: systematic, phylogenetic, caryology, palynology, study of the seeds, etc., none must have the predominance over the others

why an hybrid in a consensus tree ?

 

 

 

Edited by jeff 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway I think we will not agree.

Even a small explanation on the 2n = 64 of this taxon ?

jeff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

a bit short 

jeff

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