The flowers from two plants look different in terms of colour as well as morphology. Are they both true B. guehoi?
Dear Cindy-san,
Konnichiwa!
Thank you very much for sharing fantastic photos!
I am very sorry to say that I cannot identify from your photos of the flowers. But if you point out the differences of petal shape and color. It is normal range of difference in a species (same variation from same location). As I wrote many
Byblis species are allogamous plants.
If you would have each 100 different clones of both
Byblis guehoi and progeny clone of
Byblis filifolia the ICPS cultivar Goliath. I could sort them all correctly at your home. I never need to see any entire plant. I only need to see each one flower of them with a loupe (stereoscopic microscope >x40 is also better). I cannot describe it here for the moment ,what I need to see. However you will notice the feature sooner or later ,what I need to see. Because your observation skills are very nice! There is no need to hurry, you can already classify
Byblis guehoi from other species.
The below is part of my contribution on the cp-listserv in April 2009. This also explains why I cannot create any cultivar worthy of registration on the ICPS cultivar list.
Kind regards
-----------------
My posting is a mere assertion of my opinion. I do not intend it to change anyone's opinion, nor is this a proposal to the ICPS either.
--------
--------
My studies in cultivation and breeding of
Byblis taxa that are part of the large
Byblis filifolia complex (i.e. characterized by the flowers bearing anthers as long or longer than their supporting filaments) are allogamous (self-incompatible) plants. Allogamous doesn't mean an absolute self-sterile taxon. It simply means the degree of out breeding is high. I have found some clones as well as some variations are perfect allogamous plants.
Some
Byblis variations barely produce seeds will often become completely sterile by maturity. I have often been infuriated by this inbreeding depression in
Byblis species in my hybridization work.
In the wild there are always outstanding clones to be found in any wild population according to Mr. Allen Lowrie. I believe that this condition is heterosis, (i.e. a greater degree of vigor or fertility through re-combinations of dominant and recessive genes). This phenomena suggest that
Byblis species are the allogamous plants. They are maintaining a lot of genes which cannot be held by just one clone but by a number of clones within a population.
Clones will always be slightly different little by little each season from each other in the same location.I would like to say, It looks like
Sarracenia flava also practices this heterosis phenomenon in the wild.
Dr. Phil Sheridan will be able to explain this properly for US cp growers. I guess US cp growers do not hand out cultivar status to each variation of
S. flava plants found in the wild in the U.S.A. There is nothing stopping anyone naming all these
S. flava variations as cultivars, However, this would be a huge endless undertaking and a harebrained waste of time.
The benchmark for a complete allogamous plant is
Nepenthes which is a dioecious species (plants that only bear male or female parts, hence requiring for its perpetuation the proximity of two plants of different sex).
--------
I feel it is essential to resolve the following points for tropical
Byblis cultivar registration.
1) Advanced uniformity by sexual reproduction.
Usually, reproducing by sexual reproduction loses the cultivar status traits even for an autogamous plant (self-fertilizing plant). The Sweet Pea(please see my avatar) is an autogamous plant (self-fertilizing plants and also a self-pollinated species). Therefore, we can fix the character in the tenth generation by a careful selection. The clone and progeny plants of the clone are worthy of cultivar status. Maintaining a cultivar's status by sexual reproduction in an allogamous plant clone is almost unsolvable.
2) Improvement of cutting or TC propagation method
--------