|
|
Post by jonathan87 on Jun 11, 2014 17:46:55 GMT
What is the difference between Sarracenia Purpurea & S.Venosa? I virtually see no difference.
An answer would be great!
Thanks!
-Jonathan
|
|
|
|
Post by snakedr on Jun 11, 2014 18:37:33 GMT
Hi Jonathan, you can find the best and most accessible info here: www.sarracenia.com/faq/faq5538.htmlAlso, you may want to check out Sarraceniaceae of N America by Stewart McPherson and Donald Schnell for the most up to date and detailed description. |
|
|
|
Post by adelea on Jun 11, 2014 22:39:11 GMT
I'm pretty sure that 1 has hairs and the other is lacking, one has large lip the other a small one, they are both purpurea, its var venosa, their are a few variants,the other feature is its range, I am pretty sure that venosa is the southern variety (but don't quote me as I am working off memory)
|
|
|
|
Post by hcarlton on Jun 12, 2014 5:39:29 GMT
S. purpurea subsp. purpurea is the northern form, ranging throughout Canada south to New Jersey. Subspecies venosa (they are the same species) ranges from New Jersey to The gulf coast (or northern Georgia if you consider var. burkii to be a separate species). Purpurea has longer pitchers, a shorter hood, less pubescent pitchers, and a darker flower in general than venosa. All characters must be assessed together to discern though as there can be overlap on any of the defining characters.
|
|
|
|
Post by jonathan87 on Jul 23, 2014 15:36:41 GMT
Let me get this straight.
So S.Purpurea and S.Venosa are the exact same thing. The only thing that differs is the location of the plants?
|
|
|
|
Post by hcarlton on Jul 24, 2014 1:47:46 GMT
Not quite. Again, it's S. purpurea subsp. purpurea and purpurea subsp. venosa. They are separated yes by physical range, but more by morphological features. Again, subsp. purpurea has leaner, more glabrous pitchers with a smaller hood and a dark purple flower, subsp. venosa has fatter, hairy pitchers with a larger, more wavy hood and a more reddish flower.
|
|
|
|
Post by ICPS-bob on Jul 24, 2014 15:52:14 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Evans on Jul 25, 2014 3:58:34 GMT
I'm pretty sure that 1 has hairs and the other is lacking, one has large lip the other a small one, they are both purpurea, its var venosa, their are a few variants,the other feature is its range, I am pretty sure that venosa is the southern variety (but don't quote me as I am working off memory) Hi Adelea, Like always with UK growers, you're mixing characteristic of S. rosea and N. purpurea venosa together into one idea that exists on paper, but not in reality. Let me get this straight. So S.Purpurea and S.Venosa are the exact same thing. The only thing that differs is the location of the plants? No, not at all. S. purpurea purpurea and S. purpurea venosa are basically the same with S. purpurea purpurea tending to have more tubular shaped pitchers. S. purpurea venosa will sometimes appear similar to S. rosea but these are just superficial, skin deep only, associations. When you grow the plants together side-by-side you can see exactly how different and similar they are. S. purpurea purpurea is native from Northern Virginia up into Canada, however S. purpurea purpurea is now extinct in Virginia with only a handful of S. purpurea venosa sites left in the whole state. I've seen at least three different kinds of S. purpurea purpurea. S. purpurea venosa is a super rare plant--most of the habitat destruction has centered on its range. I have only seen one kind of pururea venosa. It occurs from mid-Virginia down into Northern Georgia. S. rosea is native the Gulf Coast from the Florida Panhandle west toward Texas (not so sure about where the range ends westward). S. rosea has an amazing amount of diversity, rather unlike S. purpurea venosa. Also, it is fuzzy to the touch. |
|
|
|
Post by meadowview on Aug 8, 2014 13:53:30 GMT
...Or you could read my 2010 Ph.D. dissertation on the matter. I'll be submitting the S. purpurea chapter to CPN this fall once things quiet done at Meadowview.
Sincerely,
Phil Sheridan, Ph.D.
President and Director
Meadowview Biological
Research Station
|
|
|
|
Post by kiwiearl on Aug 13, 2014 10:29:40 GMT
Hi Adelea, Like always with UK growers, you're ..... Unless you know something beyond Adelea's profile you've jumped the gun and are in dangerous territory Dave. Perhaps THE biggest insult to a Australian (or New Zealander for that matter) is to refer to them as a UK anything. This may clarify things www.thefreedictionary.com/pommie |
|
|
|
Post by Dave Evans on Aug 15, 2014 21:04:55 GMT
That's Okay with me, at this point in time, if they can't be bothered to tell S. purpurea from S. rosea I don't see any reason not to be rude. I'll just lump all UK, Australian and New Zealanders into the same category, just to be as rude as possible. It is working yet? Better yet, I'll just refer to you all as Canadian. Why not? You're mostly white and sound similar.
BTW, I'm mocking the logic of blending purp and rosea into one species.
|
|
|
|
Post by kiwiearl on Aug 16, 2014 9:13:11 GMT
|
|
