Jump to content
Forum for Epiphytic Myrmecophytes

piotrsw

Members
  • Posts

    6
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by piotrsw

  1. Hi Frank, 

    sorry for late reply. No, these are not photos from microscope, just macro lens with maximum magnification 5x. There were 4 anthers. These are my first photos of this type - close up of dissected flower - so following ones should be much better. My plant also grow quite slow. I tried to pollinate the flowers, but probably it is not self-incompatibility or there is something more to learn. 

    Best regards,

    Piotr

  2. I was searching for information about Mount Doorman Top (a great place with many Rubiaceae ant plants species) and found some problems. According to Wikipedia and an article about Nepenthes lamii, another name of Doorman Top is Mount Anggemuk. However, on Indonesian maps and on Google Maps, the name is different. Kemboe is Doorman Top, while Angemuk is a totally different one. Double "g" seems to be just spelling in different languages. https://mapcarta.com/15636274 

    Anybody could tell us more about it? Or provide some materials about this place? And the second question is, if Doorman Top is exceptionally abundant in Rubiaceae ant plants or it is just more often visited by travelers from the west to other mounts around? 

    Photograph shows New Guinea Highlands. Wikipedia

    246507783_10225695749531414_4939253317733389040_n.jpeg

  3. Unfortunately not all of us are on Facebook, so I wanted to post some of my photos and comments also here. 

    Hydnophytum mamberamoense, one of the most interesting Rubiaceae ant plants species in terms of systematics and first descriptions. As yet regarded as Hydnophytum species, but already in the "The tuberous epiphytes of the Rubiaceae 7: a revision of the genus Hydnophytum" by M. Jebb and C. Huxley has been suggested, that due to few atypical features “the species is placed in Hydnophytum more by default than by diagnosis”.
     
    Andreas Wistuba who found it in the wild, discovered that there are large differences between specimens observed by him and the best known herbarium specimen by Docters van Leeuwen 9540 from 1926.
     
    I contacted Rosemary Wise, who drew pictures in the above revision of Hydnophytum and asked her on what materials she based it on while working on the drawings of H. mamberamoense. She wrote that she probably rehydrated the flower from herbarium specimen as she never makes drawings based on any descriptions. When my young plant started to flower I took some pictures. Not the best ones, but it will take too much time before I will repeat them, so I wish to share them with our group.
    Even if a rehydrated flower would be less precise than a fresh one, I am very doubtful if this could cause such large differences in general shape of flower and petals profile. You can compare my pictures with Rosemary Wise's drawings.
     
    The leaves are identical as in Docters van Leeuwen 9540, but according to it and to the description of the species shoots can reach 50 cm long. As you can see on habitat pictures by Andreas Wistuba, the population found by him looks like Myrmecodia.
     
    I have a few hypotheses in my head. I think it can be a surprising mutation within one species, that gives 1 population long stems and the second very compact. Or these are 2 different species, that have completely by accident almost identical leaves. That is why I wanted to be sure if the drawing of the cross section from "The tuberous epiphytes of the Rubiaceae 7: a revision of the genus Hydnophytum" is correct or could it be simplified. Different flowers would mean different species.
     
    Andreas Wistuba regards this species as potentially representative of the new genus of Rubiacea ant plants. I know that some other botanists have other points of view and some research is planned.

     

    1.JPG

    2.jpg

    3.jpg

    4.jpg

    5.jpg

    6.jpg

    7.jpg

    9.png

    10-.JPG

×
×
  • Create New...