What's new
TerraForums Venus Flytrap, Nepenthes, Drosera and more talk

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Drosera capensis 'Albino'

Hi

Have some seeds left over up for grabs for a SASE :). These are Drosera capensis 'Albino'. Goes to the first person who posts to the thread that wants it.

regards,

z
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'd be happy to take those off your hands! Been considering growing cp's from seed, and I'd like to start with something easy.
 
Are these different than the cultivar, Drosera 'Albino'?
 
sorry, its the same. i updated the post. roxorboxor, i PM'd you. Please send a SASE and I'll mail it out soon as I get it.
 
No worries, I know there are now different forms of white flowered Drosera capensis. Apparently the cultivar Drosera 'Albino' has some pink to its tentacle glands, but there are other forms of Drosera capensis completely devoid of pink pigment and they are all green even under conditions of strong natural lighting. These forms, completely devoid of pink/red pigment have not yet been registered as a cultivar. I just wanted to be sure you were not referring to one of those.
 
No worries, I know there are now different forms of white flowered Drosera capensis. Apparently the cultivar Drosera 'Albino' has some pink to its tentacle glands, but there are other forms of Drosera capensis completely devoid of pink pigment and they are all green even under conditions of strong natural lighting. These forms, completely devoid of pink/red pigment have not yet been registered as a cultivar. I just wanted to be sure you were not referring to one of those.

Ahh, this answers a question I have long had. I wondered why my D. capensis 'albino' had pink glands!
 
Hey JC, do you have a link to an article or pictures showing this pure white cultivar? the subject has peaked some interest in the chats.
 
One more question, actually... :) Is Drosera capensis 'Albino' the same as Drosera capensis "alba"?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
i believe they are one in the same.. though clearly not the same as the one JC is referring to.
 
  • #10
The discussion about white flowered forms of Drosera capensis is here.

There is no cultivar, subspecies, form, or variety of Drosera with the official name "alba", other than the species, Drosera alba.
 
  • #11
that's interesting.. i wonder why so many got the illusion of Drosera capensis "alba" as being the 'white' form of D. capensis then. googling alba gets a bunch of results for places claiming the white form is officially labeled as alba.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #12
Outstanding, thanks for the ICPS link... Seems I've erred in my naming for quite some time... Good to learn, thank you!
 
  • #13
These two reference sites are some of the most reliable:

CP Database and CP Photo Finder.

Don't forget to check out the legend for the CP Database. Even invalid names are cataloged there. Valid names are those listed in dark bold type.
 
  • #14
Drosera capensis "alba" is different than Drosera alba... the alba capensis is just the white form of capensis not its own species...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #15
Sorry, but Drosera capensis "alba", no matter how you write it, is an entirely bogus name. Yes, it is different from the species Drosera alba. It wasn't discovered in the "wild", but occurred in cultivation. This does qualify it for being registered as a cultivar, and at least some of these white flowered plants were registered as, Drosera capensis 'Albino' -- the publishing details are linked to the name. Even though it was published in "The Savage Garden" and that publishing was recorded in the CP Database as
<dl><dt>N: ~[Drosera capensis var. alba {D'Amato}] </dt><dd>P: Savage Garden:129 (1998)</dd><dd>S: =[Drosera capensis {L.}]</dd><dd>C: nom.nud.</dd></dl>It is clear that this publishing was not copacetic as concerns the validity of the name, Drosera capensis var. alba.

Currently "alba" is only valid as a name in the genus Drosera, when used for the species, Drosera alba. There is a cultivar name, validly published for these white flowered forms of Drosera capensis. However, Drosera capensis var. alba is not a validly published name, nor has it ever been.

Bogus names are still, bogus names, even if I called Drosera capensis 'Albino', Drosera capensis "great white lotus" and convinced a hundred other growers to use that name, too. It would still be a bogus/false name and remain invalid, and likely be a source of confusion -- especially to growers attempting to learn correct plant nomenclature.

******************************
An interesting observation is that plants which are actually devoid of red pigmentation in all parts, may not appear so. Apparently the droplets of mucilage on the tentacle tips will pick up and reflect ambient light from object near them, such as hands/fingers, this makes them appear to have their own, darker pigment, when, in fact, they are only green or transparent.
 
Last edited:
  • #16
There has been extensive discussion on this in the ICPS forum and listserv in the past.

The cultivar name Drosera 'Albino' has been registered:

Carnivorous Plant Names Database

N: $[Drosera ' Albino ' {Borret & Farrow}]
P: J.Carniv.Pl.Soc. Autumn: (1989)
S: =[Drosera capensis {L.}]
B: R.Borret, Oxford; N.Farrow, Felixstowe, Suffolk, early 1988
Nominant: R.Borret & N.Farrow
Registrant R.Borret & N.Farrow
HC: Registered 10. 11. 1998 {JS}
Description: J.Carniv.Pl.Soc. Autumn: (1989)
+ "After "growing-on" it became obvious that one plant was unusual for
+ it presented a white flower and not the usual pink colour. The plant
+ was propagated further by leaf cuttings and seed and was found to
+ breed "true" (i.e. white flowers were produced). Another and
+ probably more significant feature of the described form is the lack of
+ red colouration in the leaves and tentacles under various lighting
+ conditions, including strong sun."
Standard: Savage Garden:128 (1998), (only second plant from left)
Propagation: leaf cuttings & seed
Etymology: after the complete lack of anthocyanins

The controversy comes from the description: "Another and probably more significant feature of the described form is the lack of red colouration in the leaves and tentacles under various lighting conditions, including strong sun." as the majority of white flowered Drosera capensis tend to have a slight pinkish tinge to the tentacles. It has yet to be determined what R. Borret meant as "the lack of red colouration". It is still not determined if there actually is a "totally" anthocyanin free form (white flowers, clear/whiteish/greenish tentacles all levels of light) vs a anthocyanin deficient (white flowers, pinkish tentacles high levels of light). It is interesting to note that the cited photographic standard in "The Savage Garden" appears to have pinkish tentacles. The white flowered D. capensis D'Amato describes as having pale pink glands.

Peter D' Amato has been responsible for many of the "bogus" names in common usage - many of the Drosera binata "names" for instance.

Since most of the white flowered D. capensis does not match the cultivar description of D. 'Albino' (lack of red colouration) many people have adopted Peter D'Amato's naming.

I just call it Drosera capensis white flowered form or D. capensis "White Flowered".
 
  • #17
But in these pale forms of normally highly pigmented species, always be careful not to interpret light reflected from tentacle mucilage droplets as actual pigment of the tentacle tip gland, itself. Perhaps by isolating them in a white or black enclosure for photographic purposes, this influence may be ruled out.

It may even be that the plant illustrated in Peter D'Amato's book may simply have been influenced/contaminated by reflected light from the other plants/objects around it.
 
Back
Top