Drosera montana var. montana

[Tamlin Dawnstar]

With snowbanks shoulder high chunks of dirty ice and spring still a billion light years away, I spend a lot of time looking into the center of flower photo's like this. The digital scans show details that the eye can never find, like the subtle darker color bleeding from the base of the petal into the lighter part beyond it. I was fortunate to have 2 flowers open on the same day to catch this scan.

 

[Vertigo]

Absolutely stunning.

 

[cephalotus88]

Hey Tamlin, yet another great drosera pic from you. What are the cultivation needs for montana? Im thinking of getting tomentosa (spelling?) or montana var. montana. Thanks-Zach

 

[Tamlin Dawnstar]

Hi Zach,

I am pretty much growing it as I do all my other tropicals, with a little care against overheating.  If you are getting the plant from our mutual friend in Oregon, be aware that the material being sold by him and by Best CP (where the stock came from) as D. montana var. tomentosa proved to be D. montana var. montana in my instance at least.  This fact was shown when the plants flowered on nearly glabarous scapes: D. montana var. tomentosa has hairy scapes.

 

[cephalotus88]

Thanks for the heads up, Tamlin. I guess I'll try somewhere else instead of out friend from oregon. Thanks-Zach

 

[Tamlin Dawnstar]

Zach,

Let me know if you find a good source for the plant? Thanks!

 

[cephalotus88]

sure thing buddy-Zach

 

[noah]

Hi Tamling and Z,

I got what was labeled as montana tomentosa from a different source. I have a few smallish plantlets right now, but they are growing. I'll let you know if they ever flower what types of scapes they throw up.

-noah

p.s. my d. har. seeds germinated.... finally!!!

 

[Tamlin Dawnstar]

Hi Noah,

D. montana var. tomentosa is another variable species. I lost the Itacambrina seedlings, but I still have one remaining plant of the Morro do Jambeiro, Grão Mogol population. It is one of the most tomentose forms that I have seen, at least regarding its stipules. It should flower this summer. Greg Bourke told me to grow them warm (&#33

, and this has been working for me. They grow more normally for me treated like any tropical droserae as long as the roots are cool.

 

[The Griffin]

Tamlin,

Do they have to have hairy scapes? There are two locations in Lowrie's catalog that are "hairless scapes" forms. Actually the D. montana var tormentosa range from very hairy scapes to slightly hairy to hairless. I have never grown any(I had a D. montana from WIP in the early 80s, that was actually spatulata), so I am not solid on any of this. I was just bringing notice to the descriptions in Lowrie's catalog.

Regards,

Joe

 

[Tamlin Dawnstar]

Although I expect there is a range of variation, my literature states D. montana var. tomentosa exhibits non-glandular sepals and scape apice versus D. montana var. montana.

Since my experience with both species is limited, I can't say how reliable the "hairy" factor is, but I seem to recall Fernando stating this was the major differentiation in the field somewhere in the Listserve archives.

I really am unsure now. I have the original protolouges for both species, but my Latin and Portugese aren't the best> Dr. Schlauer differentiates the varieties by the glandular characteristics of the varieties (eglandular in var. tomentosa vs glandular in var. montana).

Thanks for pointing out what may have been an assumption on my part. All I can say reliably is that I have never seen a "hairy" scape on D. montana var montana, but I am not experienced enough to know if this is simply underexposure or a reliable criteria. I welcome other growers opinions on this subject.


At any rate, my plants were definitely glandular, and not at all hairy. This material came from the Czech quarter named as montana var. tomentosa and montana var. montana: both flowered identically in all regards. So I suppose the question is, which are they?

 

[Guest]

I have grown plenty of tomentosas, and to settle any doubts anyone might have, the hairiness of the scapes can be very variable.  Concluding that a plant is not tomentosa based on a lack of hairiness would be incorrect.  So, now that it has been stated as fact that the montana tomentosa's being offered by at least 2 individuals are not tomentosa, and this fact has registered as fact in others minds, even though it is potentially false, how can we

1. properly ID these plants and

2. erase this fact from others minds so they realize it is not fact but possibly fiction (at least based on the invalid determining factors)?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">If you are getting the plant from our mutual friend in Oregon, be aware that the material being sold by him and by Best CP (where the stock came from) as D. montana var. tomentosa proved to be D. montana var. montana in my instance at least.  This fact was shown when the plants flowered on nearly glabarous scapes: D. montana var. tomentosa has hairy scapes.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

 

[Pyro]

I readily admit to not being a Drosera expert but wouldn't the designation of "glabarous scapes" be an indication that Tamlin is correct? Or am I mistaken that glabarous and hairy mutually exclusive?