Sarracenia 'Adrian Slack'

[Rob]

Willing to trade a division of S. 'Reptilian Rose' or S. "Wilkerson" for a Sarracenia 'Adrian Slack'.

 

[Joseph Clemens]

Sarracenia 'Adrian Slack' and Sarracenia 'Reptilian Rose' are registered cultivars, yet Sarracenia "Wilkerson" is not.

Therefore the registered cultivars have a published description and standard photographs which other plants can be compared to, which helps to verify that you have the actual cultivar. There is, however, no cultivar, S. "Wilkerson", which basically invites fraud, or misidentification. Anyone could conceivably call any Sarracenia, S. "Wilkerson", though that might be intentionally misleading, it would be difficult to construe as fraud.

BTW, single quotes are used to indicate a registered cultivar name. Double quotes indicate a pet name/nickname, or any other name which is not a validly registered cultivar name.

 

[F R e N c H 3 z]

He's referring to Sarracenia 'Leah Wilkerson' which is a registered cultivar.

 

[Not a Number]

Do you know that for a fact? Maybe the plant referred to is not the cultivar, which is the point Joseph is making.

 

[SirKristoff]

Well he doesn't even have S. 'Leah Wilkerson' or any form of S. "Wilkerson" on his growlist so its impossible to tell...

Bag, another thing you might want to do is change something on your grow list, the term is Cultivars not Cultivators....

good luck finding an S. 'Adrian Slack', you'll be at it for awhile....

 

[Baylorguy]

Sarracenia 'Adrian Slack' is one of those plants you have to usually work your way up to. There are many on here that are looking for the same plant.

 

[Dexenthes]

Am I the only one that doesn't "get" it? It looks like a pretty run-of-the-mill Sarracenia to me.

Why not just keep recreating the cross, S. flava x leucophylla until there are offspring as desirable or more than S. 'Adrian Slack'?

Maybe I'm missing something, so somebody let me in on this: What is so dang desirable about this cultivar?

 

[Rob]

ok

 

[Baylorguy]

The fact that it is rare makes it highly desirable to some. Besides this, ironically it was picked as a tribute to Adrian Slack because of its beauty... so there are obviously people out there (including myself) that DO think it stands out. It is a beautiful plant, but of course, it is your opinion if you do not find it as appealing as others do. I also personally find it appealing because it was found as a natural hybrid, so it was essentially engineered by chance in its natural habitat.

If you want to read up on the history of it and how it was selected as a tribute, check out the CPN article:

http://www.carnivorousplants.org/cultivars/cpncultivars/v29.html

Am I the only one that doesn't "get" it? It looks like a pretty run-of-the-mill Sarracenia to me.

Why not just keep recreating the cross, S. flava x leucophylla until there are offspring as desirable or more than S. 'Adrian Slack'?

Maybe I'm missing something, so somebody let me in on this: What is so dang desirable about this cultivar?

 

[Dexenthes]

The fact that it is rare makes it highly desirable to some. Besides this, ironically it was picked as a tribute to Adrian Slack because of its beauty... so there are obviously people out there (including myself) that DO think it stands out. It is a beautiful plant, but of course, it is your opinion if you do not find it as appealing as others do. I also personally find it appealing because it was found as a natural hybrid, so it was essentially engineered by chance in its natural habitat.

If you want to read up on the history of it and how it was selected as a tribute, check out the CPN article:

http://www.carnivorousplants.org/cultivars/cpncultivars/v29.html

Thanks for that, that was a good read. I do find it to be a beautiful Sarracenia, no doubt about it. But it's certainly being treated as a "holy grail" of sorts.

With how frequently and easily Sarracenia flower and hybridize I just find it interesting that growers are hounding over one particular clone.

 

[RL7836]

Thanks for that, that was a good read. I do find it to be a beautiful Sarracenia, no doubt about it. But it's certainly being treated as a "holy grail" of sorts.

Actually, that's all it takes. More people like it than the number of plants that are available. How do you think Cephalotus 'Hummer's Giant' clones reached over $500. It's not that they were $450 'better' than non-HG clones...

With how frequently and easily Sarracenia flower and hybridize I just find it interesting that growers are hounding over one particular clone.

Which S. flava & which S. leucophylla clones would you cross to get something similar? Some have hypothesized that it's a complex cross and at least one has suggested that it is S. oreophila and not S. flava in the cross.

This is the 1st hybrid Sarracenia that I actually wanted to own. It's beauty has overwhelmed my disdain for hybrids.

... to each his own.

 

[SDCPs]

What I don't understand is why Barry Rice thinks S. 'Judith Hindle' rivals this plant...I traded my S. 'Judith Hindle' plants away because I didn't like them. All I have left is my atavar pic...

 

[Brokken]

Thanks for that, that was a good read. I do find it to be a beautiful Sarracenia, no doubt about it. But it's certainly being treated as a "holy grail" of sorts.

With how frequently and easily Sarracenia flower and hybridize I just find it interesting that growers are hounding over one particular clone.

It's nice, but I do find that the period during which it looks its best is fairly short. The pitchers start out looking whitish and green and color up nicely for about 3 weeks or so before they start browning around the edges. Most likely my dry San Jose conditions contribute greatly to the longevity or lack thereof of the pitchers, but I can honestly think of other crosses - like S. 'Leah Wilkerson' which are more spectacular than S. 'Adrian Slack'.

 

[flytraplady5]

I am still checking my grow area to see if I have any extra
It wouldn't be a show plant for several years as i am more into propagating instead of growin my plants huge
Lois