Are these really carnivorous?

[JMN16150]

Are these plants carnivorous? It keeps on popping up in my mind and is a pain to not know if they really are carnivorous...:
Roridula Sp.
Byblis Sp.
Stylidium Debile
Nepenthes Lowii(I know neps are carnivorous, but a video on YouTube messed my mind up with this one )
If anyone knows if these plants are really carnivorous, can you reply? Thanks everyone!

 

[Iwest]

Roridula sort of is. There's a species of insect, Pameridea roridulae, that lives on the plant. When the Roridula traps a bug with its dew, the Pamerideas eat and digext the captured prey (they've evolved to live on the plant without trapping themselves). Their feces are what gets digested by the plant since it can't digest its prey for itself. It's a mutualistic relationship between the plant and the insect. And I'm pretty positive both the N. lowii and Byblis are indeed carnivorous.

 

[JMN16150]

Interesting Thanks, now I need to find out if stylidium debile is carnivorous!

 

[jimscott]

It's listed as quasi-carnivorous.

 

[Peatmoss]

To clarify, Byblis and Roridula are both thought to utilize symbiotic organisms is to help with their digestion process, as in they do not produce enzymes. Neither do Darlingtonia or Heliamphora. They require some kind of vector to aid in digestion. Just as we have bacteria in our intestines to aid in our digestion process, these plants have organisms to help them digest their food.

But since all these species clearly demonstrate mechanisms that are meant to encourage the capture of insects (sticky leaves, nectar, ect) they can be classified as carnivorous.

 

[n bicalcarata]

what the video say about lowii

 

[Lil Stinkpot]

I don't consider Stylidium as carnivorous. All it does it hit the pollinator with a pouf full of pollen, it has no intention of ever consuming said be-poufed insect.

 

[Peatmoss]

Lil, Stylidium is considered to be carnivorous by some because of the Drosera like glands on their flowerstalks, not the pollen triggers.

The glands are really hard to see, but apparently they do capture stuff...

 

[Lil Stinkpot]

Huh. Go figure. Learn something new every day! You are right, I didn't even notice the glands, and I usually have sharp eyes.

 

[richjam1986]

Regarding stylidium: http://sarracenia.com/faq/faq5760.html

Stylidium has been proven to produce digestive enzymes, so it's pretty much proven to be carnivorous (or at least 'quasi carnivorous'). And Peat is right, it's NOT the flower trigger that acts to capture prey, but sticky glands around the flowers.

With Bibilis and Roridula, etc, just because they need other organisms to help them digest their prey doesn't mean they're not carnivorous. As was mentioned, most animals have symbiotic bacteria in their gut to aid in digestion. An extreme example is cows that need many many species of bacteria in their rumen to help them digest otherwise undigestible cellulose from grass. These plants still end up getting a huge part of their nutrients from the prey they capture, even if they don't digest the prey themselves.

 

[richjam1986]

And yes, lowii has transitioned to getting most of it's nutrients from tree shrew droppings, so it is at most minimally carnivorous in the wild (as with N. ampularia, getting most its nutrients from falling leaves). That doesn't mean it's not frickin' awesome!

 

[Lil Stinkpot]

And yes, lowii has transitioned to getting most of it's nutrients from tree shrew droppings, so it is at most minimally carnivorous in the wild (as with N. ampularia, getting most its nutrients from falling leaves). That doesn't mean it's not frickin' awesome!

+100000

 

[amphirion]

Even if flowerstalks of stelidium are capable of digesting insects, I still do not consider it carnivorous--because it should be the leaves of the plant should be responsible for attraction and capture of insects. Cephalotus, dionaea, drosera, sarracenia, heliamphora, darlingtonia, pinguicula, drosophyllun, utricularia, Byblis, and to some extent, roridula and brochinnia, have all modified their LEAVES to capture prey. Flowerstalks are not leaves, and not the main constituent of a plant. Therefore, eh....

I'll leave my thoughts at that.

 

[mcmcnair]

John, but he's asking if the plant is carnivorous and flower stalks are part of the plant I am of the opinion that if a plant traps and digests it's prey in some form of another, despite the aid of a symbiotic organism it is carnivorous.

 

[fullcollapse]

Even if flowerstalks of stelidium are capable of digesting insects, I still do not consider it carnivorous--because it should be the leaves of the plant should be responsible for attraction and capture of insects. Cephalotus, dionaea, drosera, sarracenia, heliamphora, darlingtonia, pinguicula, drosophyllun, utricularia, Byblis, and to some extent, roridula and brochinnia, have all modified their LEAVES to capture prey. Flowerstalks are not leaves, and not the main constituent of a plant. Therefore, eh....

I'll leave my thoughts at that.

I think one could argue that the leaves of utricularia and genlisea are not carnivorous. Rather the underground, or underwater, bladders and stolons are responsible for the carnivory.

 

[amphirion]

I think one could argue that the leaves of utricularia and genlisea are not carnivorous. Rather the underground, or underwater, bladders and stolons are responsible for the carnivory.

those bladders of utricularia and forks of genlisea ARE modified leaves.

*note* peatmoss showed me photos of stylidium having glands on their leaves when young....i guess you can argue that they have a carnivorous phase from that....

 

[Peatmoss]

Actually the bladders and forks are modified stolons...

I believe that the Stylidium species I showed you kept its leaves all its live, but I'm not certain.

 

[Keith]

and for my 2 cents: Flowers and scapes are just modified leaves anyway, before there were flowers there were only leaves, or so the botany prof. loved to preach. And he would be extremely pleased if he knew I mentioned that potatos are not a root, but a stem lol. I should print out this post and see if he gives extra credit for remembering useless information.

 

[amphirion]

Actually the bladders and forks are modified stolons...

I believe that the Stylidium species I showed you kept its leaves all its live, but I'm not certain.

lolz. bladders and forks grow off the stolons, and not part of the stolon themselves. they are modified leaves last time i checked.

for utricularia:
"The numerous small bladders are modified hollow leaves with sensitive bristles on "trap door" entrances." http://www.msb.unm.edu/herbarium/nmplants.html

for genlisea:
"It has no true roots and instead has highly modified subterranean leaves that act as the carnivorous trapping mechanism" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genlisea_margaretae

@shortbus: yes, semantics, semantics

 

[JMN16150]

Thanks a lot, guys!

And yes, lowii has transitioned to getting most of it's nutrients from tree shrew droppings, so it is at most minimally carnivorous in the wild (as with N. ampularia, getting most its nutrients from falling leaves). That doesn't mean it's not frickin' awesome!

The video on Youtube that I saw was 'The private life of plants', narrated by David Attenborough(I think I spelled it right...), it didn't say anything about it eating bugs. It did say that this lshrew licks the nectar and that people believe that the nectar encourages #2ing. That explains why N. Lowii upper pitchers look like toilets Richjam1896, I didn't know that Nep. Ampularia gets its nutrients from leaves.

Huh. Go figure. Learn something new every day!

I guess you do!

Say, has anyone used their finger to activate the flower? It looks like it would hurt:grin: