Cephalotus stuff and theories

[Escamillo]

Is Cephalotus a more evolved Nepenthes? Are they related in any sense? They seem very familar that is pitcher attachment
but isn't similar in flowers, those useless traps.
could be a ancient form of nepenthes or a more evolved?

-

 

[tmurphy44870]

Technically cephalotus is not genetically linked to any other species, genus or family of carnivores. It is the perfect example of convergent evolution. I believe it is a core eudicot in the oxilades family.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[tmurphy44870]

It is also worth mentioning that cephalotus is the only cp like this. Literally all other cps are related however distantly except them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[DragonsEye]

Is Cephalotus a more evolved Nepenthes? Are they related in any sense? They seem very familar that is pitcher attachment
but isn't similar in flowers, those useless traps. could be a ancient form of nepenthes or a more evolved?

In what respect are the traps "useless?" They still function as pit-fall traps like those of other pitcher plants.

As has been mentioned, cephs are not closely related to any of the other cps. In the murky science that is taxonomy, according to the ITIS:
cephs belong to the CLASS: Magnoliatae (aka Magnoliopsida),ORDER: Rosales indicating they are distantly related to such plants as magnolia and roses.
Dionaea muscipula belong to the CLASS Magnoliopsida, SUPERORDER: Caryophyllanae (which includes carnations), Order Caryophyllales, Family Droseraceae
Drosera belong to the CLASS Magnoliopsida, SUPERORDER: Caryophyllanae , Order Caryophyllales, Family Droseraceae
Neps belong to the CLASS Magnoliopsida, SUPERORDER: Caryophyllanae, ORDER: Caryophyllales, FAMILY: Nepenthaceae

Sarracenia belong to the CLASS: Magnoliatae (aka Magnoliopsida), SUPERORDER: Asteranae (name derived from the flowering plants known as asters) ORDER: Ericales.

In this regard, cephs are related to other cps -- if one goes back as far as the CLASS. However, in taxonomic terms, that is not a close relationship at all. (Consider that humans, mice, and whales are all members of the CLASS: Mammalia.)

 

[tmurphy44870]

In what respect are the traps "useless?" They still function as pit-fall traps like those of other pitcher plants.

As has been mentioned, cephs are not closely related to any of the other cps. In the murky science that is taxonomy, according to the ITIS:
cephs belong to the CLASS: Magnoliatae (aka Magnoliopsida),ORDER: Rosales indicating they are distantly related to such plants as magnolia and roses.
Dionaea muscipula belong to the CLASS Magnoliopsida, SUPERORDER: Caryophyllanae (which includes carnations), Order Caryophyllales, Family Droseraceae
Drosera belong to the CLASS Magnoliopsida, SUPERORDER: Caryophyllanae , Order Caryophyllales, Family Droseraceae
Neps belong to the CLASS Magnoliopsida, SUPERORDER: Caryophyllanae, ORDER: Caryophyllales, FAMILY: Nepenthaceae

Sarracenia belong to the CLASS: Magnoliatae (aka Magnoliopsida), SUPERORDER: Asteranae (name derived from the flowering plants known as asters) ORDER: Ericales.

In this regard, cephs are related to other cps -- if one goes back as far as the CLASS. However, in taxonomic terms, that is not a close relationship at all. (Consider that humans, mice, and whales are all members of the CLASS: Mammalia.)

Thanks for the plant families. Good to know I wasn't completely wrong. Their uniqueness is one of the reasons I love them so much.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Escamillo]

In what respect are the traps "useless?" They still function as pit-fall traps like those of other pitcher plants.

As has been mentioned, cephs are not closely related to any of the other cps. In the murky science that is taxonomy, according to the ITIS:
cephs belong to the CLASS: Magnoliatae (aka Magnoliopsida),ORDER: Rosales indicating they are distantly related to such plants as magnolia and roses.
Dionaea muscipula belong to the CLASS Magnoliopsida, SUPERORDER: Caryophyllanae (which includes carnations), Order Caryophyllales, Family Droseraceae
Drosera belong to the CLASS Magnoliopsida, SUPERORDER: Caryophyllanae , Order Caryophyllales, Family Droseraceae
Neps belong to the CLASS Magnoliopsida, SUPERORDER: Caryophyllanae, ORDER: Caryophyllales, FAMILY: Nepenthaceae

Sarracenia belong to the CLASS: Magnoliatae (aka Magnoliopsida), SUPERORDER: Asteranae (name derived from the flowering plants known as asters) ORDER: Ericales.

In this regard, cephs are related to other cps -- if one goes back as far as the CLASS. However, in taxonomic terms, that is not a close relationship at all. (Consider that humans, mice, and whales are all members of the CLASS: Mammalia.)

I thought that they formed some different pitchers in certain seasons.

 

[Grey Moss]

Like others have said they aren't that closely related. It's convergent evolution producing a similar structure for similar purposes. Bats and birds are another example of this. Bats are not birds but they have also evolved wings for the purpose of flight.

 

[tmurphy44870]

I've heard bladderwort dumps useless genes. Maybe they are the results of now suppressed pieces of genetic information that can't be expressed properly anymore.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[hcarlton]

Cephalotus have absolutely no similarities in pitcher structure to Nepenthes other than the fact that they're pitchers. No other pitcher has trap attachment near the top of the pitcher, four wings, specialized digestive patches rather than spread out glands, or regular production of intermediate photosynthetic leaves/traps between seasons. They don't produce useless traps, only intermediate leaves which are not the same thing.

 

[Clue]

The ICPS has a nice page about Cephalotus phylogeny and carnivory in the Oxalidales here: http://www.carnivorousplants.org/cp/evolution/Cephalotus