CARNIVOROUS PLANT
NEWSLETTER

VOLUME 17, Number 4

DECEMBER 1988

CARNIVOROUS
PLANT
NEWSLETTER

Official Journal of the

International Carnivorous
Plant Society

Volume 17, Number 4
December 1988

Front cover: Sarracenia rubra ssp. alabamensis in pitcher (front cover) and flower (rear cover).
Photos in habitat by Donald Schnell. Please see article on page 104.

The co-editors of CPN would like everyone to pay particular attention to the following
policies regarding^our dues to the ICPS.

All correspondence regarding dues, address changes and missing issues should be sent to
ICPS c/o Fullerton Arboretum, CSUF, Fullerton, CA 92634. DO NOT SEND TO THE CO¬
EDITORS). Checks for subscriptions and reprints should be made payable to ICPS.

All material for publication, comments and general correspondence about your plants, field
trips or special noteworthy events relating to CP should be directed to one of the co-editors.
We are interested in all news related to carnivorous plants and rely on the membership to
supply us with this information so that we can share it with others.

Views expressed in this publication are those of the authors, hot necessarily the editorial
staff.

Copy deadline for the June 1989 issue is March 11, 1989.

CO-EDITORS:

D.E. Schnell, Rt. 1, Box 145C, Pulaski, VA 24301
J.A. Mazrimas, 329 Helen Way, Livermore, CA 94550

Leo Song, Dept, of Biology, California State University, Fullerton, CA 92634

Seed Bank: Patrick Dwyer, St. Michael’s Episcopal Church, 49 Killean Park, Albany, N.Y.
12205, U.S.A.

ACTING BUSINESS MANAGER AND MANAGING EDITOR: Leo C. Song, Jr.

PUBLISHER: The International Carnivorous Plant Society by the Fullerton Arboretum,
California State University, Fullerton, CA 92634. Published quarterly with one
volume annually. Typesetting: California State University, Fullerton Repro¬
graphic Center. Printer: Kandid Litho, 129 Agostino Rd., San Gabriel, CA91776.
Circulation: 817 (203 new, 614 renewal). Dues: $10.00 annually. $15.00 foreign.
Reprints available by volume only ©1988 Carnivorous Plant Newsletter. All
rights reserved. ISSN # 0190-9215

98

Carnivorous Plant Newsletter

SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENT

Since subscriptions are by the calendar year-volume, you will find enclosed with this issue
a renewal envelope. If you do not need to renew at this time or have already done so, then use
this envelope for any communication with the Society. The Co-editors wish to take this
opportunity to thank everyone for their support this past year. Also, we extend best wishes
for a happy holiday season. Keep those papers coming.

Your co-editor, Leo Song, now can be reached via computer mail for those of you who
have access to any network that interfaces with BITNET. My bitnet address is LEOSONG@
CALSTATE. The complete routing within the CALSTATE domain is CCS.CSUSCC.
CALSTATE, but is not necessary to reach me.

NEWS & VIEWS

DAVID W. EICKHOFF (1224-409 Ala Kapuna St., Honolulu, HI 96819) has sent us
some canceled stamps of the Republic of Palau, which is located in the Carolines in the
Federated States of Micronesia. The $2.00 stamp features Nepenthes mirabilis in full color
against a natural background and the plant’s name is on the stamp. Nearby we have printed a
black and white photo of a canceled stamp. The cancellation date is September, 1988, so
unused stamps are likely available from the Palau postal service or stamp collectors’ shops. A
few years ago CPN featured an article on CP on stamps, and this particular one is new.

pacau s

IBRARY

JAN SO 1389

NEW YORK
TANlCAL GARDEN

PAT KITE, 5318 Stirling Ct., Newark, CA 94560.

In the December issue, 1 987, a book was reviewed on page 88 from England which I was
informed was incorrect in its price. The Centre for Life Studies book on Carnivorous Plants
informs me that the current price is 1 .50 Pounds and not 57p. A copy sent by surface mail
would cost 2 Pounds for book and postage, in English money only.

ROB MAHARAJH, (94 Ainslie Avenue, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, L8S 2K2) writes:

Since placing an ad for trading and/or selling Drosera villosa in the June 1988 issue of
CPN, I have been swamped with requests for this surprisingly large, very shy-flowering
Brazilian Drosera. An even bigger surprise hit me upon realization that its attractively
red-colored, strap-shaped, hairy leaves were not decorating the collections of any North
American CP’erphile to my knowledge. That would explain the avalanche of orders! I
obtained my original plant for 12 Swiss Francs (about $12 CDN) in a small plant shop in
downtown Zurich while vacationing in Europe during the summer of ‘87. Consequently, I
tried taking leaf cuttings and, after many a trial and failure, I finally struck 6 plantlets from 4
leaves. The method is as follows: cut off several leaves in the late fall - no more than 6 leaves
from a large adult plant - keeping about at least 1 cm of petiole; then, place on the surface of

Volume 17 • December 1988

99

moist milled sphagnum making sure to tuck in the petiole into the moss but do not cover the
leaf. The key to success, 1 believe, is to maintain a very high humidity environment and a
constant temperature between 70-75° F 2 1 -24° C. 1 accomplish this by placing the cuttings in
a small plastic terrarium ( 1 2x22x 1 6 cm width: length: height) having many small ventilation
holes at its top. The container is then placed near an isothermally maintained, southern
window where it gets about 3 hours of direct winter sunlight. Providing that the cuttings have
not turned brown by about the 8th or 9th week, small buds will appear, sometimes 3 per leaf.
Do not press down or clip the sphagnum moss which will naturally grow around and above
the cuttings: this situation creates an ultrahumid microenvironment. After the plantlets
develop their 4th or 5th leaf, they can be potted in pure milled sphagnum and placed in an
area receiving a maximum of 4 hours direct sunlight. Drosera villosa makes an excellent
fluorescent light subject. During the winter, my plants are grown indoors under a 2 tube, 48”
long (one tube is cool-white; the other, “Grolux”) assembly, complete with reflector, at a
distance of 25 cm and set for a photoperiod of 14 hrs. The growing medium is moist but
well-drained. Under these conditions, the plants develop a very desirable uniform bright
blood-red coloration.

RICKY MAULDER, 145 Lone Kauri Rd., Kara Kare, Piha, Auckland, New Zealand.

Concerning the notes I wrote in the C.P.N., Vol. 14(2), p. 32, 1 would like to state that I
moved to a new area by the sea. Since I had no room in my glasshouse for some plants, 1 had
to put many of my Nepenthes x mastersiana plants outside. I let one or two of them to dry out
and the others planted in the ground were eaten by opossums or they grew very well during
the cooler weather but summer proved too hot and burnt the leaves away. The Nepenthes
villosa continued to grow well at the old house but I was too stupid, for some reason, to place
this plant into the glasshouse. As a result of actually placing it on the edge of a heat board, it
went downhill faster than a roller coaster and I managed to get it outside with only one leaf
left. It continued to grow one leaf while the last leaf died. It survived this way for 4-6 months
until it finally said goodbye to me. If I ever get a N. villosa or seed again, I will be sure it stays
outside this time.

Soon, I will put more Nepenthes outside and these will be N. tobaica and N. ventricosa as
I have plenty of these and they grow very fast all year. One N. tobaica seedling grew over 2
feet during the winter months and this is in a drafty, unheated glasshouse that is half-shaded
by trees at a latitude of 37° south. The plant started out about 1 0 inches high in the autumn.
Now, a year later, it is 8-10 feet long with several shoots 1-4 feet long. This is the fastest cold
growing Nepenthes I have to date.

On the other hand, N. reinwardtiana not only looks different in its leaves, stem, pitcher,

etc., but it is also a warm growing type. I have killed at least 20 plants from low and high
elevations in trying to grow it cool. I have many other species of plants which will surprise
you on whether they grow very cool or only warm but this will be reported another time.

I also am trying to pollinate flowers for seed of either species or hybrids but I have little
luck. If anyone is interested in making Nepenthes hybrids or species seed, I would be
interested in a pollen exchange system. This just might work with having opposite seasons
down under.

I am planning to visit Sumatra in August, 1 989, for 30-40 days. I may be spending most of
the time moving from south to north looking for Nepenthes and plan to climb mountains in
unexplored areas for new species or visit new areas looking for old species. If I have time after
Sumatra, I may go to Sarawak, Kalimantan or Sulawesi but all this depends on what travel
information I can obtain from readers. If anyone is interested, then contact me for further
details especially if they are interested in going on such a trip. Also, I would be grateful to
receive any information or an address where I can purchase maps of such areas like
Kalimantan showing the mountain regions.

100

Carnivorous Plant Newsletter

At this stage, I am planning to camp on mountains for one or more nights depending on
accessability to the summits. At times it would be a rough trip! 1 don’t intend to half-climb
the domes and then return to a soft bed at nightfall. To explore the area fully, you may have
to stay up the mountain for a full day or two.

JOE MAZRIMAS reports that the San Francisco Fair Flower Show had a great
response from local CP growers. A variety of 85 plants were displayed this year — a
substantial increase over last year! The exhibitors were: Mickey Urdea, Peter D’Amato,
Mike Morris, Larry Logoteta, Charles Powell, Barbara Powell, Leonard Roth, Joe and
Kathy Mazrimas, Kirk Henderson, Rex Walker and Geoffrey Wong. The best plant in the
show was won by Geoffrey Wong which was a bonsai version of Drosophyllum and he also
won the best Australian plant award for his huge Cephalotus specimen. The show was well
attended and it was fun talking to all the growers and people with their questions about CP.

Best of show Drotophyllum bonsai. G. Wong & best Australian plant.

Photos by J.A. Mazrimas.

W. BARRY Van WINKLE, (3201 Overton Manor Dr., Birmingham, AL 35243) writes:

Now that everyone has seen Tom Gibson’s color photo (CPN 17:84) of his glorious N.
rajah pitcher. I’m sure there are many, like myself, “moved to ecstatic exclamation” (quote
from above article) and clamoring “Where can I get such a wonderful plant?” I realize that
these rarities are protected and on the CITES list so commercial sources are out for the most
part. As a result, a colleague and I are setting up tissue culture systems for Nepenthes. While
a slower process than cuttings, we should be able to raise more plants this way. I’d be most
grateful to anyone if I could obtain N. rajah (or other scarcer Nepenthes, i.e. lowii,
edwardsiana, vietchii etc) leaves (tendrils used in tissue culture) or seeds. Any source or help
so we can spread some of these rare beauties to other collectors would be gratefully
appreciated.

Should any of you be having trouble getting fresh bugs for your CPs maybe I can help. In
my CP greenhouse I have a couple of Stapelia, also known as “carrion cacti” because of the
“rotten meat” scent their gorgeous 8" diameter star-shaped flowers exude to attract flies. And
attract them they do! Even in very cool weather. After their egg-laying frenzy, the flies seek
to replenish themselves and the nectar glands of the strategically-placed Nepenthes beckon.
End of fly and story!

Volume 17 • December 1988

101

SOME OBSERVATIONS OF A POPULATION
OF NEPENTHES MAD A GASCA RIENSIS
IN MADAGASCAR

By Gary James

Orange Coast College, 2701 Fairview Road, Costa Mesa, CA 92626

Madagascar, the fourth largest island in the world, is located about three hundred miles
off the east coast of Africa. Geologists estimate that the island has been separated from other
land masses for as long as one hundred million years. Because of this long isolation, many
unique plants and animals have evolved on Madagascar,

Among the more familiar plants are the travelers palm, Ravanala madagascariensis,
which is not really a palm but is more closely related to the banana and Heliconia groups of
plants. The Madagascar periwinkle, Vinca rosea, is used in landscaping, and the pitcher
plant, Nepenthes madagascariensis is of interest to people interested in insectivorous plants.

The southern part of the island is quite arid and the vegetation of this zone is nicely
adapted to the climate. Each year the rainy season begins in December and ends in April with
a long generally dry period from May to November. The temperature is mild throughout the
year. The above mentioned plants are residents of the southern arid zone, at about 300 feet
elevation. Near the town of Fort Dauphin, in southern Madagascar are many eroded
hillsides with deep gullies and red sun-baked laterite soils.

The forests in this area have long ago been cleared by cattle herding tribesmen of the
Mahafaly people who graze their herds on the sparse grasses which have replaced the forests.
Burned every year during the dry season, the flush of new grass provides life sustaining food
for the herds of Zebu cattle owned by the local people. The clearing of the trees and the
burning of the grass exposes the clay soils to erosion. Gullies channel the hillsides and the
exposed soil turns brick hard.

It is in this eroded landscape the Nepenthes madagascariensis makes its home. Scattered
in dense clumps up to three feet across and twelve to eighteen inches high, the plants are
found over a wide area growing among stands of Ravanala madagascariensis. The plants
observed were healthy with many pitchers at the tips of the leaves. In August during our visit
none were observed to be in flower. No doubt, with the advent of the rains in December, the
plants will begin to flower. In August the soil was dry and little rain had fallen for many
weeks. The pitchers were about one-quarter filled with fluid. A few were tipped out to reveal
a large number of insects as well as much decayed material in the bottom of the pitcher.

The area we visited covered perhaps three to four acres, and there were hundreds of
clumps of Nepenthes as well as many Ravenala scattered over the area. The Nepenthes were
bright green in color and the clumps contrasted markedly with the dry chimps of grass. The
hillside faced north so the plants were spared the direct sun and its attendant drying effects.
The population was large and healthy. It is an area where tourists stop, adjacent to the main
road, en route to a nearby lemur preserve.

Unfortunately, in a poor country like Madagascar there is little incentive to preserve
areas such as this. The plants in this particular population are thriving but probably should
be afforded some protection from trampling and collecting. There are no doubt many similar
areas in the vicinity where these plants may be found. They seem to have adapted well to the
harsh conditions on the hills where they live. Hopefully the population will continue to thrive
on their southern Madagascar hillsides.

102

Carnivorous Plant Newsletter

Nepenthes madagascariensis in Habitat

M

1

s .

« »-

I!

* l
32
S2

O

« &

Is:

s JS

£ S
«•£
TS @9

^ o

js **

E «

2 ?

II

?;

ui as

Volume 17 • December 1988

103

Close-up view of clump of N. madsgascarlensis. Another clump of N. madagascariensis.

PROPOSED LISTING OF SARRACENIA
RUBRA ssp. ALABAMENSIS AS AN
ENDANGERED SPECIES UNDER THE U.S.
ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT

by Donald Schnell

(Rt. 1, Box 145C, Pulaski, VA 24301)

On 1 3 May, 1 988, 1 received a letter dated 27 April along with an outake from the Federal
Register dated 21 April, 1988 from the US Fish and Wildlife Service of the Dept, of the
Interior.

This material detailed the proposed listing for the pitcher plant Sarracenia rubra ssp.
alabamensis under the Endangered Species Act. This official notification is intended to
precede any responses from concerned individuals by either direct means or through local
meetings. Unfortunately, all this must have been done in June, long before you read this. The
process may be complete by then, in which case we will add a short notice to this issue. After
the period for public response, the Congress will (on their own time schedule!) vote for final
acceptance or not, and acceptance is most likely.

During the interim, the ESA rules state that no federal activity that endangers the
proposed species can be undertaken without appropriate review. Following listing, all rules
of the ESA apply, including shipment permits for material interstate. As a matter of ethics,
we recommend that 1CPS members treat the subspecies as though fully accepted during the
interim period before final congressional vote.

The Federal Register goes into some detail concerning the history of the subspecies, a
brief botanical description and location ecologic characteristics, and a rather complete
bibliography. At one time, a total of 27 locations in the Elmore/ Chilton/ Autauga Counties
area of central Alabama was documented but now only 1 1 are claimed to be known, three of
these being of any significant size. As I have mentioned in a previous CPN article, I have
managed to find several additional locations through various means. One of these has been
timber harvested in the past three years after which the plants responded beautifully to
increased light conditions in succeeding seasons. The location is rather high on a ridge but
associated with a broad, slow seep slope at the edge and has over 1 00 genets with most of each
of these having 25- 50 ramets. The flowering was quite startling this past spring. Contrasting
with the Federal Register statement of a typical habitat, the peat layer was no more than 3-5
cm on the surface immediately above solid or rarely sandy clay.

Contrary to the usual policy of listing plants for ESA acceptance, a site survey has not
been done for this subspecies in order to protect location data, which certainly seems
reasonable.

Since most of the locations are on private lands including those of a large timber
company, little will probably be done to forestall fire prevention or encourage clearing and
no other physical disturbance. As is the case so often, private intervention by an organization
such as the Nature Conservancy to purchase or otherwise seek donation of good locations
and then manage them appropriately may be the salvation of at least a few of the diminishing
locations.

NOTE

Please see front and rear covers for photographs of Sarracenia rubra ssp. alabamensis in
pitcher and flower respectively.

104

Carnivorous Plant Newsletter

ICPS SEED LIST

9/24/88

Capsella bursa-past oris (non-CP); Darlingtonia californica; Dionaea muscipula; Drosera
aliciae; D. brevifolia (1); D. burkeana (4); D. burmannii (10); D. capensis (N.L.); D.
capillaris (10); D. dielsiana (3); D. erythrorhiza; D.filiformis filiformis; D. filiformis tracyi
(3); D. glanduligera; D. intermedia; D. intermedia (Carolina giant) ( 10); D. linearis (2); D.
lovellae (10); D. montana (2); D. natalensis (1); D. pauciflora (10); D. pygmaea (10); D.
rotundifolia; Pinguicula caudata (8); P. grandiflora (1); P. ionantha (8); P. primuliflora (3);
P. macroceras “nortensis”(2); Sarracenia alata; S.flava “Copperlid”(3); S.flava “typica"; S.
leucophylla; S. minor; S. oreophila; S. psittacina (4); S. purpurea purpurea ( 10); S. purpurea
venosa (2); S. purpurea venosa “Louis Burke”; S. rubra gulfensis; S. rubra jonesii (5); S.
rubra rubra ( 1 2); S. rubra wherryi; S. alata x minor (10); S. x areolata ( 1 2); 5. x catesbaei (7);
S. minor x rubra rubra (3); S.flava x (alata x flava) (4); S. (psitt. x purp. x minor) x rubra
wherryi (10); S. purp. x psitt. (5); 5. purp. / rubra x psitt. x alabamensis (3); 5. (leuco x
wherryi) x (purp. x psitt.) (3); S. (jonesii x purp.) x (purp. x psitt.) (1); S. rubra x (psitt.. x
leuco.) (1); S. leuco. x wherryi) x alabamensis (3); S. alabamensis x psitt. (3); S. minor x
oreo.) x alabamensis (3); S. (oreo. x purp.) x wherryi (2); Utricularia lateriflora (1); U.
pentadactyla (8); U. uliginosa (13).

Pat Dwyer also sent a check for $200. Great work. Kudos for Pat and for those who donated
seeds.

WANT ADS

Rob Maharajh

(4 Ainslie Avenue, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, L8S 2K2)

WTB: Fresh seed or gemnae of Byblis gigantea, Drosera cuneifolia, Drosera trinervia
any variety, Drosera cistiflora varieties, Drosera burmanni, Drosera natalensis, Drosera
neocaledonica, Drosera slackii, Drosera arcturi, Pinguicula grandiflora any variety,
Pinguicula longifolia any variety, Pinguicula vallisneriifolia, Pinguicula pumila, Pinguicula
alpina, Pinguicula lusitanicum, Pinguicula agnata, Pinguicula esseriana and Pinguicula
ehlersae. Plant(s), tuber(s) or cuttings Drosera regia and any tuberous Drosera.

TS: Drosera linearis, Drosera spathulata varieties, Drosera adelae, Drosera intermedia
“Carolina Giant” and “Maxima”, Drosera prolifera, Drosera dielsiana, Drosera burkeana,
Utricularia longifolia, Utricularia sandersoni, Byblis linifora and many others. I would like
to contact CP enthusiasts from around the world.

Jay Hearn

(P.O. Box 360, 62 S. Main Street, Avoca, New York 14809 U.S.A.)

Wanted to buy: Book “Pitcher Plants of Peninsular Malaysia & Singapore by Roger G.
Shivas. Please send price!

ED. NOTE: Please use the following address for all future want ads.

ICPS - WANT ADS
Fullerton Arboretum
California State University
Fullerton, CA 92634, U.S.A.

Volume 17 • December 1988

105

SCAPE AND AXIL CUTTINGS OF
DROSOPHYLL UM

by Richard Tilbrooke

(c/o Poste Restante, GPO, Adelaide S.A., 5000, Australia)

In the winter of 1985, I germinated my first set of harvested seeds from two
Drosophyllum plants that managed to survive since the winter of 1984. They grew and
flowered later over the summer of 1 985 / 1 986, i.e. December to February 1 985- 1 986- a period
of 3 months. In the bracteoles of these scapes, I found miniature plantlets which I attempted
to root in late February and by May they were still alive.

Shane Pickford, a good friend of mine, didn’t believe that they had rooted so I dug up a
cutting and I found three roots about 4 cm long and about 0.5mm wide at the base. The
original plants after flowering also produced plantlets in the axils of many of the leaves.
These can also be used for taking cuttings. If left on the plant, they will become woody and
eventually grow and mature into separate branches attached to the main stem.

To take cuttings, first hold the scape or mother plant with your left hand and the young
shoot with the right hand. Gently tear away the plantlet with a downward stroke. (SEE
SLIDE 2) Next, remove all leaves that have completely unfurled. (SEE SLIDE 3). Place
plantlet in the pot so that only the unfurling leaves can be seen. (SEE SLIDE 4). The
rneristem portion is just under the soil surface.

ADDENDUM

(THE ELECTROCHEMICAL MECHANISMS
OF TRAP CLOSURE IN
DIONAEA MUSCIPULA)

By John D. Degrcef

6, rue Libotte, B-4020 Liege, Belgium

NOTE:

Two recent articles have brought supplementary data on the electrophysiology of
Aldrovanda and Dionaea. Concerning the resting potential, the cell negativity of — 130 mV
due to selective diffusion of K+ is increased to — 160 mV by a K+ pump. The latter is
suppressed in winter, when ATP is scarce. Most cells of the trap, including the parenchyma’s,
are of the excitable type, and have similar plasmalemmas. As to the action potential, its peak
is best explained by an outflow of Cl — and an inflow of Ca++. The extracellular calcium
entering the cell, and the Ca++ coming out of the endoplasmic reticulum (through the action
of a messenger formed by Phospholipase D) must trigger the closure mechanism. The
outflow of K+ following the action potential has also been demonstrated.

SOURCES:

1 1 JIM A, Toshio & SIBAOK A, Takao (1985) Membrane Potentials in Excitable Cells of
Aldrovanda vesiculosa Trap Lobes. Plant Cell Physiol. 26(1): 1-13.

HODICK, Dieter & SIEVERS, Andreas (1988) The action potential of Dionaea
muscipula ELLIS. Planta (Berlin) 174:8-18.

ED. NOTE:

The main article appeard in the last issue of CPN (17(3): 80-83; 91-94).

106

Carnivorous Plant Newsletter

Volume 17 • December 1988

107

Stripped cutting ready for planting. Planted cutting with growing tip just under soil surface.

CP COMMUNICATIONS— CREATION OF A
NEW SOCIETY PROGRAM?

by Bob Hanrahan

P.O. Box 70513, Marietta, GA 30007-0513

The full impact of the CITES regulations are now being felt by commercial CP nurseries
and hobbyist alike. Unless the regulations are modified, we will have to learn to live with
minimal overseas transfers of some plant material and learn to propagate affected plants
within our respective countries.

To accomplish this, communications between individual CPN’ers will be far more
important than it has been in the past. This report will present a concept for the society
members to consider as one way to improve member to member communications.

Have you ever needed some advice about growing a certain species or genus but did not
know who to turn to for advice? Did you write to one of the CPN co-editors or to a specialty
CP nursery who you have purchased plants from? Were you disappointed in that the
response did not come soon enough for your needs? 1 know from my experience that this
must be the case for many of you, for I have not always been that responsive in my letter
writing.

But if you knew the name, address and possibly the phone number of someone who was
willing to help, would you hesitate to write or call them instead? What I am proposing to the
CPN membership is the creation of a new service to members, a Communication and
Information Distribution Service (CIDS) or Information Transfer Service (ITS). CIDS/ITS
would be a means for you to obtain information directly and quickly from someone who lives
in your geographical area. An area representative would be selected from volunteer
candidates and this individual would maintain a list of CPN members interested in being part
of the network. A species interest profile would be maintained on each member and used for
consultation purposes. One other point, the area representative would not necessarily have
to provide and answer questions, but would make referrals to someone who could be of
assistance if the questions extended beyond their knowledge or experiences.

In addition to handling correspondence within his area, the area representative would
submit a quarterly report to the CPN co-editors highlighting local questions, small talk and
generally what is happening in the region with CP and the hobby. The short paragraph
reports would be published in CPN collectively in each issue.

Specifically, the purpose and intend of the program would be to:

Improve communication between members

Allow members to learn of each others existence in the same region

Reduce the amount of correspondence your co-editors are asked to respond to each year

Foster the creation of local CP gatherings and bog-hops (field trips)

Expand the CPN “News & Views” section to include the events from the worldwide
membership on a consistent basis.

This list could continue, but I am sure you get the idea. The number of area or regional
representatives needs to be considered. Initially, a minimum of one rep each for Australia,
Canada, Europe and- Japan would be required. Language related and membership
concentration factors could easily alter the number of representatives. The U.S. could
position a representative in the Northeast, Southeast, Midwest/ Central, and Pacific regions
to start the program.

I am using this open forum approach to initiate some creative thinking from CPN’s
highly intelligent membership. I present a very basic start of something different for you to
ponder over and improve on. A new name other than what I have presented would be a most
welcome beginning. If you have some ideas (pro or con) on such a service, please write to me
and let me know your thoughts. I will collect, summarize and forwward our combined ideas
to the co-editors for their consideration as a new service from the Society. -

108

Carnivorous Plant Newsletter

LITERATURE REVIEW

Crouch, I.J. and J. Van Staden. In vitro propagation of Drosera natalensis. S. Afr J. Bot.
54(1): 94-96 1988

When a modified Murashige and Skoog medium supplemented with various hormones
was used, clones of this Drosera species budding from the explant tissue could be
subcultured on defined media and then hardened off.

Debbert, P. Two new Drosera spp. from Cape Province, South Africa. Mitt. Bot.
Staatssamml. Muench. 23(0): 431-436 1987

Two new species, Drosera admirabilis and venusta are proposed and described.

McNally, S.F., A. Stewart and U.E. Wilson. The stimulation of acid phosphatase activity in
the stalked gland of Drosera rotundifolia. Ann. Bot. (Lond.) 61(3): 289-292 1988

In comparing stimulated and unstimulated tissue, some acid phosphatase activity was
localized in vacuoles, cell wall regions and cuticular pores of only a few cells. When
stimulation occurred longer than 24 h, additional activity was noted in most gland cells
which suggested that there was a new synthesis of acid phosphatases during this time period.

Ng, P.K.L. and R.P. Lim. The taxonomy and biology of the nepenthiphilous freshwater
sesarmine crab, Geosesarma malayanum Ng and Lim, 1986: Crustacea, Decapoda.Brach-
yura, Grapsidae from Peninsular Malaysia. Malay. Nat. J. 41(2/3): 393-402 1987

This crab lives in the fluid of the cups of the pitcher plant Nepenthes ampullaria and the
authors describe its habits compared with other phytotelmic crabs from South America.

Turnbull, J.R. & A.T. Middleton. A new species of Nepenthes from Sabah, Malaysia. Bot.
J. Linn. Soc. 96(4): 351-358. 1988

A Nepenthes macrovulgar is, a low mountain meadow species from Mt. Silam is
described and illustrated.

SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENT

REBECCA HAUSER, 12V& Hill St., Apt. B, San Francisco, CA 941 10.

I’ve attempted to order carnivorous plant seed over the past few years, and thought you
might be interested in the following updates for your 1988 source list:

CARNIVOROUS GARDENS OF BRISBANE, QLD 41 10, Australia has gone out of
business, I think in May or March of this year.

EXOTICANA SEEDS of Greytown, South Africa has not responded to several requests
for listings in the last two years.

MARSTON EXOTICS has been incorporated into Lawnsdown Nurseries Limited,
Veldifer Lane, Kings Acre, Hereford, England, HR4 7AA. Some of the more seldom found
plants and books are no longer offered.

RENATE PARSLEY, I am happy to say, is still in business, offering a small listing of
interesting Drosera seed, but at the following new address: 1 Woodlands Road, Somerset
West, 7130, South Africa.

I hope you find the above information useful. Some of these small businesses can be hard
to keep track of!

(Editor’s Comment)

To insure that the results of this program concept can be included in the March- 1989
issue of CPN, please send all comments directly to Bob Hanrahan, 2130 Meadowind Lane,
Marietta, Georgia 30062 U.S.A. before January 21, 1989.

Volume 17 • December 1988

109

DEPTH WITH PERSPECTIVE
3D PHOTOGRAPHY

by Richard D. Tilbrooke

(c/o Poste Restante, GPO, Adelaide 5000, S.A., Australia)

A prerequisite to three dimensional photography is depth of field extension. This process
as 1 use it involves two 35mm slides to create a fuller representation of the subject. In each
slide a different angle and plane of focus is chosen so when viewed together using two slide
viewers, the two complement each other and a deeper depth of field is obtained along with
three dimensional effects.

Unless one has access to lenses with better than f 1 6 reciprocity, a subject such as pygmy
Droseras can pose a great many problems. Very often, focusing on the stipulate crown of a
rather tall pygmy Drosera results in the rosette being out of focus, and vice versa.
Consequently it is advantageous to try the following technique. Make a slide focusing on the
rosette of traps and another (without moving the camera) whose focus centers on the crown.
When viewed together using a pair of small viewers (one for each eye), they will be
superimposed so that an average of the two images is perceived by the brain. The focus of the
average image is not as sharp as either of the two sister slides, but the depth of field is
improved.

True 3D photography when done correctly allows you to send a true representation of
your plants around the world. There is one great advantage with this technique: Views
unable to be witnessed by the naked eye can be achieved with a camera! How close can you
hold a match to your eyes so that it is possible to see it sharply still and in perspective? For
me it is about three centimeters from my forehead; but with a camera the limit depends only
on your equipment, time and patience.

5

• •

• •

t

t

*

6

-> -o -o -o j j

®
• •

<>®>:

7

• •

• •

%

8

\

nr^i

1

• •

# 9 SUBJECT

r-0— i

1 | CAMERA

2

• •

• •

r~E3~i

I ® |

e in

VIEWFINDER

3

• •

4

« •

* ^

*

To

%

<*>

• •

•• I

110

Carnivorous Plant Newsletter

In order to photograph your subject in 3D, place it in the center of your camera’s
viewfinder (it is best if the camera is mounted on a tripod). Move the camera right or left (see
accompanying diagrams 1-8) so that the center of your original view now just eclipses one
edge of your viewfinder frame by about half. Rotate the camera on the spot to bring the
subject back into the viewfinder center, focus, and then make your exposure. Reverse all
procedures so far taken for the second slide. The camera should once again squarely face the
subject so that the image appears centrally in the viewfinder. Now move the camera in the
opposite direction so that the subject eclipses the other edge of the viewfinder image by about
half. Once again, rotate, focus on the subject and make an exposure. After film processing,
you should have a 3D slide pair.

Each of the two slides in a pair should now be labeled “right” or “left” depending on what
angle you have used as shown in figures 1-8. Be certain these are accurate (follow a set
procedure or make notes while photographing), and that both slides are oriented as to
backing or emulsion side. These can be viewed by placing each slide into two inexpensive
slide viewers that are held up to the light for viewing (eg Afga). Manipulate the two slide
viewers around until the left slide being seen by the left eye and the right slide being seen by
the right eye blend into one 3D image. This takes some practice at first, but after the first set it
is easily accomplished thereafter.

This process will give you realistic depth at about 10-30 cm. from the subject. For closer
images, say with bellows, begin by moving halfway across the viewfinder image and
experiment from there. For macrophotographs it is better to move the subject than the
camera. (In some cases, pots can be more easily slid across accurately as in figures 1-8 rather
than moving the camera on its tripod).

I can assure the readers that if you have not been interested in Utricularia bladders up
until now, wait until you see them in 3D! If this is not enough and you want to go the full
hog, then you can also try depth of field extension while focusing on your 3D subject.

I am sure that you, like me, will receive great joy from even your first slide pair. If,
however, you feel uncertain as to the benefits of this marvelous medium, then I will gladly
lend slide pairs from my modest library to those who already have two viewers or to those
who wish to purchase a pair of viewers from me. I can supply a pair of viewers for $15.00
(Austral.) which covers purchase, postage and packing to anywhere in the world.

EDITORIAL NOTE—

After receiving this from Mr. Tilbrooke and seeing some of his slides, we knew we wanted
to present 3D CP photography to our readers. But how? It was obviously impractical to
make enough slide pairs copies for all subscribers, so we had to figure out some way to use the
printed page. Joe Mazrimas finally came up with the mechanism. If you follow his
instructions, you can see 3D in these photos accompanying this article!

INSTRUCTIONS

Place your nose on the page between the left and right picture and slowly pull the page
away from your eyes forming a third image in the middle between the pictures. T ry to ignore
the right and left images and concentrate on the third image which is at first out of focus. Try
to focus this third image holding the page about 15 to 18 inches away from your eyes. In
about 10 to 30 seconds, a new, in focus, image will suddenly appear which will now have a
3-D look to it. Hold the page very steady when focus is achieved. People who wear contact
lenses or have astigmatism may experience some difficulties in doing the above gymnastics
with their eyes.

Volume 17 • December 1988

111

112

Carnivorous Plant Newsletter

Volume 17 • December 1988

113

ON THE CULTIVATION OF
DROSERA LINEARIS

by Richard Shomin

983 Barney, Flint, MI 48503 (313) 239-4742

The best way to begin cultivating any plant is to study its natural habitat, especially if that
plant is difficult to grow. The only reason why any plant may be difficult to grow is that the
grower is not meeting the conditions for that plant which depends on the grower’s budget,
knowledge and determination. The enjoyment of growing a desirable plant lies in making an
environment economically and requires little attention.

First of all, 1 would like to relate some observations on two marl fens with Drosera
linearis, one in southeastern lower Michigan and one in northeastern lower Michigan. In the
winter the hibernacula survive the cold January temperatures with a possible freezing depth
of 1 2 inches, based on the ice fishing in the southeast area. The marl flats develop a thin layer
of ice, but 1 find that standing on them is unyielding to my body weight suggesting that the
marl is also frozen.

So much for one temperature extreme. I have found temperatures much higher than
some sources suggest for growing the species. I have field notes on marl and air temperatures
that 1 have taken throughout the summer of 1988, though not complete. Drosera linearis can
take the heat, especially in southeastern lower Michigan. The first ten days in July of 1988
high temperatures were at or near 100° F. On one of those days the marl temperature was
93° F and the air temperature one inch above the marl was 105° F. However, this did not
bother the plants at all.

In the summer the plants were exposed to direct sunlight most of the day in both locations
and grow as clumps and separately in both locations. In the southeastern fen I found some
Drosera linearis at the base of mossy hummocks along with a few plants of sterile Drosera
anglica, but these plants did not grow on the hummocks but I also found a few pioneering
plants on the open marl. The northeastern location Drosera linearis grow on the marl flats
and on some of the hummocks as well. Drosera linearis grows on the short, isolated
hummocks, but does not grow on the thicker hummocks along the edge of the fen. The
Drosera linearis on the hummocks grow just as vigorously as the ones in the nearby marl. Is
this linearis able to compete with the faster growing vegetation of the hummocks? Is this a
case of “typical” linearis and “competitive” linearis with intermediates, or are the short
hummocks growing slow enough and able to hold seeds better than the marl and thus have
the appearance of preference?

I have had limited success growing this species outdoors in my area. During the winter of
1987-88 the hibernacula were brown-green and were frozen during January and February.
By mid-April they turned bright green and started growing. I was using marl as a growing
medium in undrained plastic pots and my water supply is rainwater which at the time was
very clean; it was collected during winter thaws. Then by early summer I compared the
culture plants with the wild and concluded they did not grow as vigorously as the wild plants.
The plants in culture needed watering daily and this left me with the impression that this
periodic raising and lowering of the water table stressed the plants. In their natural habitat
the seep water flows at a somewhat steady rate keeping the water table a constant level.
Drosera linearis does not need precipitation to survive. During the drought of 1988 the
plants were doing just fine with their only source of water coming from seeps. On the other
hand, if a thunderstorm passes over dumping three inches of rain, that extra water will
quickly drain through the fen’s natural drainage system.

T o keep the water table constant in culture attempts, I came up with an apparatus shown
in Figure 1, which I had constructed by August 1988. Even if I am wrong about a changing
water table stressing the plants, the apparatus I propose is a practical way of growing the

114

Carnivorous Plant Newsletter

plants and requires less attention. The two inner tubes support the entire weight of the
support frame, pots, soil and plant. 1 have tested the mechanics of this system without plants
and will try growing these plants next year with some results by next autumn (1989).

The reason for two inner tubes is that if one deflates the other will float the system. If you
plan on using a fine grade of dolomite or marl, I recommend 1 square inch of siphon
cross-section area for every 1 6 square inches of soil surface area. The response to changes of
water table depth is acceptable.

On a fair weather day the water flows from the reservoir to the marl to replace the
evaporating water. If it rains and there is an access of water in the culture, the water flows
from the culture to the reservoir. You may put a drain hole 1 centimeter above the marl so
that the plants aren’t submerged to a greater depth for too long.

This self-adjusting system takes about 12 hours to bring the water table back to normal
after a heavy rain. The occasional drainage from the pot has the benefit of reducing the
soluble mineral content that might have built up. The reason it takes this long is because the
marl behaves as a clog. However, the flow is slow but sure. The water level should not be
more than 2 centimeters below the surface of the marl as estimated from the natural habitat.

My siphon is made of glass for easy inspection to see if it is working. After a period of time
gases may build up in your siphon rendering it inactive. The siphon recharging tube is a
practical way of recharging your siphon without disturbing the soil and plants.

To recharge the siphon simply plug the end into the reservoir, remove the stopper and fill
with clean water, and then put the stopper back on. Make sure it has a good seal. Do not
worry about gases in the recharging tube. It’s when the gases get into the siphon proper that
you have to recharge.

Water quality is also a very important factor in growing this species. By mid-July I found
that rainwater collected after a long drought is too dirty or nutrient-rich for linearis. Use only
the cleanest rainwater - toward the end of a long rain, or if it also rains the very next day that
water should be cleaner than the previous collection. Let the water stand for a week, then
look for color in the water and any film on the surface. The water should be clear with no film

FIGURE 1

Volume 17 • December 1988

115

CP IN A SOUTHEASTERN MICHIGAN FEN

S. purpurea in a southeastern Michigan ten.

116

Drosera linearis In a southeastern Michigan
fen. All photos by author.

Carnivorous Plant Newsletter

on the surface. There will always be some sediment from rainfall, so after using nearly all the
collected water shake up the collection vessel and dump the remainder, and prepare for the
next collection of water. If you don’t want to gamble at all and pay a little more for it, use
distilled water. You could build a solar still to be economical.

Use chickenwire around your reservoir so that the birds don’t use it as a bird bath and
contaminate your water. You also need a sieve to keep bugs off the surface of the water. If
you want to grow the plants in peat moss using this method that’s an experiment left to the
reader. The parts of this apparatus are inexpensive and should be inspected annually for
cracks in the inner tubes.

Finally, I found a marl fen in southeastern lower Michigan that has a large population of
Sarracenia purpurea but does not contain Drosera linearis. This fen is now public land and
there is evidence that it was once exploited for its limestone. It has two marl flats that look
like they could support Drosera linearis. I am considering transplanting some plants and
seeds to this location. If the plants grow and reproduce, they may possibly have grown there
once before. If they do not grow there, then either they never did, or possibly the aquifer is
contaminated because of human development. If they do grow there they have a better
chance than threatened habitats on private land that I have seen. I would hate to see Drosera
linearis eliminated from southeastern lower Michigan. It would mean a longer trip for me to
go see them, and possibly the loss of a genetically different plant than those of upper
Michigan and the northern tip of lower Michigan.

Fortunately, this fen is secluded and not accessible to the casual wanderer such as the
average person on a Sunday picnic. Deerflies and mosquitos will be enough to turn most
away. If that is not enough, peat muck, poison sumac and massasauga rattlesnakes might be
the Final discouragement.

The other thing — a constant water table might be a difference between good growth and
luxurious growth of acid bog CP. I have seen some of the local kettle hole bogs that have
Sarracenia purpurea and Drosera rotundifolia that are larger than my culture plants which
are in undrained pots. The floating sphagnum mats in these bogs assure that the water table
of these plants is constant no matter if it is a dry year or a wet one.

Acknowledgements:

I would like to thank Frederick W. Case for these locations and hints of what to look for
in finding fens.

References:

1. Voss, E.G., Michigan Flora, Parts I and II, Cranbrook, 1972.

2. Schnell, D.E., Caslanea, 47(4), Notes on Drosera linearis in Northeastern Lower
Michigan, USA, 1982.

3. Schnell, E.D., Drosera linearis, CPA 9:16-18, 1980.

4. Pietropaolo, J. and Pietropaolo, P. A., Carnivorous Plants of the World, Timber Press,
1986.

FOR THE RECORD

In Barry Rice’s article “A Varying Lighting Scheme and Its Effects on Some Easily
Grown CPs” which appeared in the September, 1988 issue of CPN, the plant referred to as D.
‘Lake Badgebup White Flower’, was incorrectly identified. According to Barry, it is actually
D. pygmaea.

Volume 17 • December 1988

117

BOOK REVIEW

by Donald Schnell, CPN Co-Editor

CRUM, HOWARD. 1988. A FOCUS ON PEATLANDS AND PEAT MOSSES.
University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor. 306 p.

The true CP enthusiast usually expands from a narrow interest of acquiring plants and
growing them using standard methods to study of the environment in which they are found.
This reviewer has spent many hours in various peatlands in which there was not one CP in
sight, but I still had a great and productive time just enjoying and studying the peatland.

I can recommend this book without hesitation to all those who are interested in learning
more about peatlands, particularly those in the broad Great Lakes area and upper midwest
generally. The author’s primary interest is bryology, (study of mosses and liverworts) but this
has taken him to many peatlands and his accumulated experience, research and knowledge
of these areas comes through clearly in this book along with a great affection for the areas,
even when hip deep in a false lake bottom!

The First 200 pages or so of the book covers peatlands in general, and the author dives
headlong into the mire of confusion regarding naming and classification. He discusses bogs,
fens (rich and poor), marshes and swamps and carefully defines his concepts of them and
points where he differs from others, or even from concepts that apply more closely to other
parts of the country (eg Maine) or even of the world (British Isles, Sweden, Germany, etc.).
His focus tends to return to the Great Lakes area. The terms ombrotrophic, eutrophic and
dystrophic are put into perspective, and other wetlands such as lakes, seeps and mires are
correlated, and terms such as strings and flarks are carefully described.

Throughout the book are great numbers of very well printed black and white photos,
charts, tables and especially useful and superb line drawings. I cannot say enough about the
line drawings which meet the botanical art criteria of sharply illustrating important
diagnostic points in an artistically pleasing and balanced presentation. Higher plants were
drawn by Marie Wohadlo, and sphagnum drawings by Constance Butley.

The entire book is interesting and informative but I was especially impressed by the
chapters on plant/ peatland relationships (which presented a photo/drawing flora by
Wohadlo), the chapter on nutrient cycling which is written quite understandably and is far
more complete than similar discussions in general biology and botany texts and most
ecology works I have read, the chapter on bog exploitation for medical, heating,
horticultural and other commercial reasons, and finally the pages in the book beyond p. 200
which present what is to me the first clear lead into understanding taxonomy of Sphagnum
spp. Dr. Crum eases one’s apprehension and says it can be done, tells how to do it, then
presents keys, good descriptions of each species, and Butley’s drawings of each species, one
to a page with the whole plant, branches, leaves, pore and retort cells, pertinent histologic
structures, spores, etc. Many people may not realize that various Sphagna are highly adapted
to niches and microhabitats of each kind of peatland.

The actual mention of CP is confined to Great Lakes species (except for Dionaea) with
about a page and a half of text, and the superb photos and line drawings. But this should not
deter the beginning or amateur CP enthusiast from adding this book to their library as a
ready source of pertinent peatland information.

The book concludes with an excellent glossary, an index, and a bibliography of 286
references, many as recent as 1987.

The flyleaf suggests this is the first entry into a projected series called GREAT LAKES
ENVIRONMENT edited by Warren H. Wagner, Jr. We look forward to ensuing books.

The book is available in hard and soft cover. Write the University of Michigan Press, Ann
Arbor, Ml 48106 for price, postage and sales tax information.

118

Carnivorous Plant Newsletter

THE EVOLUTION OF ALDROVANDA
AND DIONAEA TRAPS

John D. Degreef, 6, rue Libotte B-4020, Liege (Belgium)

The classical model:

Many authors have noted the resemblance between Drosera tentacles and the sticky
protective glands found in many plant species (LLOYD, pp. 4-5).

Adrian SLACK, in his 1979 book ‘Carnivorous Plants’, and Dr. B.E. JUNIPER,
scientific adviser to a remarkable Oxford Scientific Film (1986), thought that Drosera traps
could derive from such protective devices. The existence of sticky glands on the flower scapes
of many Drosera species seems to confirm this interpretation.

Ivan SNYDER (1985) went a step further and showed how a Drosera leaf could have
transformed into a Dionaea trap. The tentacles would have lost their stalk, except for the
ones on the rim which transformed into the marginal teeth, and the ones that became sensory
hairs. The trap could lose its tentacles when the closure movements had become sufficiently
rapid.

Dr. JUNIPER (1987) was skeptical about the origin of the marginal teeth, and pointed
out that their vascularization is different than tentacles.

Fossil evidence:

The oldest pollen from the family Droseraceae is Droseridites parvus from Assam (N.E.
India) (SAH & DUTTA, 1974), which dates from the Paleocene (65-55 MYA). This is the
period just following the extinction of the Dinosaurs (and of many other animal groups). At
the time India still was a large island covered with rich tropical forests. These (and
Droseridites) were destroyed when the continent drifted into the arid climatic zone. We
therefore cannot say much about this find, except that the Droseraceae seem to be the oldest
carnivorous plants: pollens of Nepenthaceae and Lentibulariaceae only appear during the
Miocene (23-5 MYA).

Eocene sediments (55-38 MYA) have yielded pollens belonging to two different
Droseraceae genera.

The first, Saxonipollis, is AldrovandaAike. CHANDA (1965) has indeed shown that the
pollen tetrads of each of the four present genera of the Droseraceae (Aldrovartda, Dionaea,
Drosera and Drosophyllum) have a specific and recognizable structure.

Aldrovanda 's Eocene ancestors occupied a large range, from the two species which grew
near London (CHANDLER, 1964) and Saxonipollis saxonicus from East Germany
(KRUTSCH, 1970) to ‘‘ Aldrovanda" unica and the somewhat larger "A. "kuprianovae from
Priangarje, near Lake Baikal in Central Asia (KONDRAT’ IEV, 1973). This corresponds
well with part of the present range of Aldrovanda vesiculosa. Contemporary Africa was
separated from Europe and Asia by the Thetys Sea (TERMIER & TERMIER, p. 301), and
Saxonipollis probably did not get there. The Northern portion of the North Atlantic opened
up fairly late, and it does not seem impossible for Saxonipollis to have reached North
America in late Cretaceous, Palaeocene or early Eocene times. Some mammals did (ibidem,
pp. 295-297), taking advantage of the climate in arctic North America and Europe, which
was temperate yet maybe too cold for Aldrovanda: Metasequoia and Credneria forests then
covered Greenland and Baffin Island (ibidem, p. 295). There were also faunal contacts
between S.E. Asia (including the regions around Lake Baikal ?) and the Rocky Mountains
(ibidem, p. 302).

The second Eocene genus belonging to the Droseraceae was recently discovered in
Australia: Fischeripollis halensis from the Hale Basin, dating from the Middle to Late

Volume 17 • December 1988

119

Eocene (TRUSWELL & MARCHANT, 1986). The DionaeaAike pollen of this genus had
previously been found in later, Miocene sediments from Germany.

The Australian find is quite exciting. The only modern Droseraceae genus in the
Southern Hemisphere is Drosera. These regions had not been as severely hit by the Glaciary
periods as the Northern continents, and it does not seem likely that entire genera belonging
to the family we are dealing with could have become extinct. So Fischeripollis halensis would
appear to be an ancestor of the Australian Drosera. Because of the resemblance with
Dionaea pollen, another Fischeripollis must have produced the genus Dionaea of which only
one species remains.

One must be aware that the fossil evidence is too scant to allow definitive conclusions.
But one thing it does not show is Drosera- type plants to be older than Dionaea or
Aldrovanda. The problem is complicated further by the fact that leaf evolution is more rapid
than the evolution of pollen (and flowers). A plant with archaic Fischeripollis pollen thus
could already have possessed true Drosera traps, long before the regular Drosera pollens
finally appeared during the Miocene. There are indeed palaeogeographic arguments for the
development of Drosera tentacles in late Cretaceous times.

Evidence from the modern plants:

With the fossil evidence being so inconclusive, one has to turn to a careful examination of
the anatomy and physiology of modern Droseraceae.

Aldrovanda vesiculosa L. is a strange plant which has been considered as a relict from the
Tertiary ever since KORZSCHINSKY’s 1887 publication. Its flower is strictly pentamere
(five sepals, petals, stamens, styles and placentae). This is the expected ancestral structure of
a Droseraceae flower which in most other species has become more or less modified. DIELS
(1906) also pointed out the many common characteristics between the Droseraceae and
regular waterplants. Aldrovanda has been a waterplant for a long time: its embryo never
even attempts to produce a primary root (LLOYD, p. 196) and its vascular system is much
more atrophied than for example in the Lentibulariaceae (which appeared during the
Miocene). The germinal aperatures of the Aldrovanda pollen grains possess an operculum
which is unique in the whole family (SAHASHI & IK.USE, 1973). This confirms that this
plant’s ancestors have split off from the main body of the Droseraceae at a very early date,
probably Cretaceous. If this the most primitive member of its family is an aquatic, is it not
possible that all archaic Droseraceae were waterplants? And if the flower structure is
primitive, could this not apply to the trap also?

How could such a trap have evolved? If we look at the trap’s “hinge”, we can see that the
epidermal cells are elongated, with their long axis parallel to the midrib. The apex of the
hinge carries two or three nasty looking imbricated teeth, and the abaxial surface of the
whole midrib bears a number of bifid glands. On both sides of the midrib, the trap lobes are
seen to be formed of three cell layers: the adaxial and abaxial epidermis and the large
turgescent parenchyma cells. The long axis of all these is perpendicular to the hinge. The rim
of the lobes features a row of unicellular teeth with a large aqueous vacuole and a diminutive
nucleus (FENNER, 1904 p. 366). The two epidermis carry trichomes, some of them identical
with the ones on the outside of the midrib, others more specialized (but the initial
embyrology of all these is the same).

Now there are structures in the same plant which look very much like the midrib of the
trap: the setiform appendages which surround the trap and are said to protect it against
floating debris. But this function does not seem to explain the presence of unicellular teeth on
the setae. At the apex we find the same kind of imbricated thorny structures as on the midrib.
The setae carry bifid trichomes (also present on most other surfaces of the plant). The long
axis of the cells is parallel to the axis of the setae.

Could the Aldrovanda trap not be a much broadened seta with specialized features? We
may then picture the ancestor of Aldrovanda as a waterplant with cuneate leaves, these
carrying between 7 and 9 setae (as shown by regressive leaves, to be discussed later). The

120

Carnivorous Plant Newsletter

“path to camivory”was not as difficult for such a plant as one may imagine. Waterplantsare
rootless, and since their epidermis is covered with an impermeable waxy cuticle, they have to
absorb water and solutes through their trichomes. These possess a porous cuticula and an
endodermoid layer analogous to the one which controls the entrance of substances in roots.
In Aldrovanda the bifid trichomes are abundant on the juvenile leaves which, together with
the growing point, already possess a cuticula (CASPARY, 1859 p. 1 29). These hairs respond
to chemical stimulation in the same manner as the digestive glands in the mature trap or as
the glands of Drosera tentacles (FENNER, p. 378). An adult plant contains only about 20
milligrams of dry weight (KAMINSKI, 1984), so most of its volume is water, which has to
enter the plant. These hydric needs are greatest during the volume increase associated with
growth, hence the trichomes on the leaf buds. The trichomes then tend to fall off. The last
ones to do so are situated in two significant areas: near the midrib on the abaxial side of the
trap, and on the same side at the level of the abaxial capitate (digestive) glands (FENNER, p.
373). These two sites must use more water than elsewhere, the former during closure (a
growth phenomenon with a volume increase), the latter either to produce digestive
secretions, or to keep the osmotic pressure of absorbed substances under control
(DEGREEF, 1988 p. 35). An alternative explanation is that the trap is the last structure to
mature.

With water slowly flowing between the setae of the trapless prehistoric plant, organic
debris may have accumulated there. The small teeth on the setae may have enhanced debris
getting entangled. Organic substances could then be absorbed if two conditions were
satisfied: first of all, digestive enzymes would have to be secreted into the debris. Secondly,
the digestion products would have to be prevented from escaping. Thus plants with a broader
seta featuring slow folding movements would be selected out.

Enzyme secretion in Aldrovanda has not been clearly demonstrated yet, but is likely to
exist here as it does in the three other genera. The secretion must be produced by the
specialized capitate hairs, which also have been shown to be the site of absorption of
digestive products (FABIANGALAN & SALAGEANU, 1966). Their increased number of
cells, the buttressed cell walls of these (containing a labyrinth of the plasmalemma as in
Dionaea?) vastly augment the absorption surface. Some of the trichomes specialized in
detecting the presence of debris, and later of animals. They lengthened and acquired a
sensory hinge. It should be stressed that sensitive trichomes are the rule rather than the
exception in the Droseraceae. The numerous stellate hairs on the outside of the Dionaea trap
have been shown to produce action potentials upon stimulation (DIPALMA et al., 1966).
The sensitive portion of the Drosera tentacles is the gland (DARWIN, through LLOYD,
p. 140), which really is a trichome perched on top of the stalk, i.e. an expansion of the leaf
blade (botanically: an “emergence”). The series of action potentials which cause the tentacle
to curve originate in the gland head proper (WILLIAMS & PICKARD, 1972). The gland
heads in Drosophyllum may also perceive stimuli, although these do not lead to any kind of
movement (FENNER, p. 104).

Trap closure itself must be brought about by very rapid growth of the abaxial epidermis.
This mechanism is now accepted for Dionaea, for Drosera and even for the slow “narrowing
phase” in Aldrovanda (LLOYD, p. 203). It seems that time has come to abandon the old
ASHIDA model involving turgor changes (still accepted by IIJIMA & SIBAOKA, 1981 &
1982). Turgor changes do exist, but seem secondary to momentary water shortage after
closure.

Growth phenomena triggered by action potentials (such as those produced in the sensory
hairs of Aldrovanda and in the stellate trichomes of Dionaea) were eventually discovered in
other plants also. An example is the seedling of Bidens pilosus L. where the stimulation of the
cotyledons causes action potentials which inhibit the growth of the hypocotyl (DESBIEZ et
al., 1983).

The traps of Dionaea muscipula ELLIS seem to resemble the ones of Aldrovanda very
much. The chromosome numbers of the two species — 32 and 48 respectively (BEHRE, 1929;

Volume 17 • December 1988

121

KRESS, 1970) — are multiples of 8. But we have seen that Aldrovanda is taxonomically
somewhat remote from the three other genera of the Droseraceae. The flower structure
shows that the closest relative of Dionaea (quite surprisingly) is Drosophyllum. This is an
element in favor of the classical hypothesis which interprets the Dionaea trap as a modified
Drosera-(or rather: Drosophyllum-) like leaf. But the main element which led to this theory
is the resemblance between the marginal teeth and the sensory hairs of the Venus’ Fly Trap
and stalked glands. Does a closer examination confirm this second point?

The marginal teeth lack any remains of an apical gland or of an endodermoid layer. Their
vascular system contains both xylem and phloem in contrast with Drosera tentacles which
only contain the former. This is not a decisive point though, because Drosophyllum stalked
glands contain the two types of vessels (and also conductive cells like the ones in
Aldrovanda).

I see another problem in identifying the marginal teeth with emergences. These latter first
appear as small pimples on the previously smooth juvenile leaf bud. Then they elongate to
their adult shape as has been well demonstrated for Aldrovanda setae (CASPARY, 1859 &
1862). Drosera and Drosophyllum tentacles (FENNER, 1904). But in 1986 I observed the
occurrence between several marginal teeth of the same Dionaea trap of a lace-like network of
leaf tissue, apparently branches of the vascular bundles. Does this imply that the teeth are not
formed like emergences, i.e. by cell proliferation away from the leaf surface; that instead they
originate by resorption of strips of tissue between them which when incomplete would leave a
network between the adult teeth? Upon close examination the teeth’s lateral rims are sharp
and slightly irregular as in leaves where tissue resorption is known to occur, e.g. the familiar
house plant Monstera (Araceae), and unlike the nice rounded sides of the marginal tentacles
in Drosera. Comparing the abaxial side of the rims of Dionaea and Drosera traps shows
them to be quite different.

Could the vascularization of the teeth not give us more clues? LLOYD’S plate 18 fig. 1
seems to show major branches abruptly cut while going towards the empty spaces between
the teeth. This would be in favor of the resorption hypothesis. But having checked seedling
and adult traps of different sizes, I have not been able to confirm this drawing: the main
bundles appear to go more or less straight into the teeth. The bifurcations going towards the
spaces between the teeth are small and of the same type as the ones seen leaving large veins
elsewhere.

Decisive evidence will only be brought forward by a thorough study of the embryology of
the trap.

There are similar questions concerning the sensory hairs which are also considered as
modified tentacles (SNYDER, 1985; JUNIPER, 1987). This identification is apparently
confirmed by the presence of a layer of cells with impermeable, cutinized cell walls just
distally from the sensory hinge (HABERLANDT, 1906 p. 12). This could be a vestigial
endodermoid layer (WILLIAMS, 1982). Such a structure is known in roots and at the base
of glandular trichomes. The special cell walls force the substances entering and leaving the
roots or the glands to pass through the cytoplasms so that their flow can be exactly regulated.
In Drosera and in Drosophyllum the gland (a modified hair) with its endodermoid gate is
perched on top of an expansion of the leaf blade (the tentacle stalk). Now in Drosera the
sensitive area of the tentacle, the site of origin of the action potentials which lead to the
bending of the stalk, is known to be the gland. So we would expect the sensory hinge of the
Dionaea trigger hair to lie distally from the supposed vestigial endodermis. But we know that
it is situated proximally instead! There is an elegant solution to this problem which is to
consider both the distal cutinized cell layer and the sensitive cells as a greatly modified
endodermis. The cell walls of the sensory hinge do contain cutin, but only in the form of
strange granules (HABERLANDT, 1906 p. 32) for which no interpretation had hitherto
been given (as far as I know). This would confirm the hypothesis by WILLIAMS &
PICKARD (1974, pp. 13-15) that the actual structure producing action potentials in the
Drosera tentacle is the endodermoid layer.

122

Carnivorous Plant Newsletter

This leaves us with almost all the cells of the sensory hair deriving from a trichome and its
endoderinoid layer. The only equivalent of a tentacle stalk would be the lower part of the
footpiece, which is not much of an emergence!

So the marginal teeth and the sensitive hairs are not very convincing as tentacle
equivalents, and this leaves us without an evolutionary model for the Dionaea trap.

Fortunately, a lot of information can be gained from regressive leaves which appear in
unfavorable conditions (this is a general principle not only in the Droseraceae). Many
Drosera, even those with forms as exuberant as D. binata LABILL., revert to ancestral
spatulate, roundish or simply forked leaves as can be seen in juvenile plants (LEAVITT, p.
202), or with the first and last leaves of the season (CLEMESHA, 1972). In Aldrovanda the
trap inhibits the formation of the setae which we have seen to be archaic leaf parts. During
the development of the leaf the lateral setae, i.e. the ones furthest away from the inhibition by
the trap bud, appear first (CASPARY, 1858 p. 721). When a group of leaves is inhibited by
the presence of a flower bud, no (or smaller) traps are formed. This allows the production of
an increased number of setae (ibidem, p. 718). In the large variety ‘Duriaei’ CASPARY,
which grows in S. W. France and can yield plants of up to 60 centimeters with large traps, the
number of setae is decreased (ibidem, p. 722). The juvenile pitchers of Sarracenia are all very
much alike, and the same thing happens in plants which are not grown in ideal conditions.
One may think that the buds produced under those conditions just do not develop, but in
reality they may truly revert to an ancestral morphology. They sometimes even produce
structures which their ancestors possessed and which were subsequently lost. Thus the
pitchers of a young axillary rosette of Nepenthes ampullaria JACK do have a waxy zone with
the characteristic deformed stomata under a narrow peristome (as 1 have observed). In the
adult, the peristome broadens into a slippery infundibulum, thus eliminating the need for a
waxy zone. And indeed, the glandular area now occupies the whole interior of the pitchers.

During the winter, or in young plants, or sometimes when growing conditions are not
right, Dionaea muscipula produces abnormal leaves, too, the extreme forms of which do not
even possess a trap. The rim of the distal portion of these “petioles” is toothed. In extreme
conditions strange outgrowths also appear which look a little like cabbage leaves (a
photograph in PIETROPAOLO, J. & P.A., 1974 p. 44). So what we have here is a cuneate
leaf with marginal teeth (which could have been longer in the past) and a strange network of
ridges. Even if the latter were covered with sticky glands and if the leaf margins could slowly
fold around a capture, the purpose of the ridges would be hard to explain in a plant growing
on land. But if the Dionaea trap developed under water like the one in Aldrovanda, these
structures would be useful. Organic debris would get entangled in the marginal teeth and in
the outgrowths. The latter would also carry glandular trichomes, and the presence of ridges
would increase the total secretion and absorption surface. In mutants able to close faster, live
prey could be captured. Only then could some of these plants leave the water. The closure
mechanism with its narrowing phase would press the glands tightly against the prey after
capture. The ridges, which had been useful to increase the contact with the shapeless organic
muck caught by the archaic traps, would now become unnecessary. They would disappear
from the sophisticated pinched-off distal portion of the leaf, which we call the trap.

Even in the old saprophytic leaf the trichomes must have differentiated into digestive
glands, sensory hairs and the capitate glands of the leaf margin. The latter now secrete a
syrupy solution which I have noted to give a positive reaction for glucose. They could be
modified mucous glands which once sealed the trap when it closed under water. Similar
glands exist in Aldrovanda. The enzymes transforming simple sugars have been demon¬
strated in Drosera gland cells during the early phases of mucous synthesis (DEXHEIMER,
1978 p. 51). The membranes of cell organelles are often included in the plasmalemma, so it
would not be astonishing to find enzymes for sugar transport relocated there, too.

The subaquatic trap evolution hypothesis presented here takes into account more data
than the classical theory. Its main drawback is that no similar evolutionary patterns are
known in other waterplants, whereas the alternative- sticky protective glands- is not

Volume 17 • December 1988

123

infrequent. But tentacles exist in the aquatic Podostemonaceae (DIELS, 1906). If a chance
mutation had allowed these to secrete digestive enzymes, they may have become carnivorous,
too. The early stages of Ulricularia evolution may also have been similar with the ones
presented, here.

Although this is not significant, we may add that in nature the Dionaea trap seems to
work well under water too. In the Fifties, Patricia R. ROBERTS and H.J. OOSTING from
Duke University discovered the remains of aquatic animals (Planarian worms. May fly
larvae and even small newts) in the traps (ZAHL, 1961).

SOURCES:

BEHRE, Karl (1929) Physiologische und Zytologische Untersuchungen ueber Drosera.
Planta (Berl.) 7:208-306.

CASPARY, Robert (1858) Sur V Aldrovanda vesiculosa. Bull. Soc. Bot. Fr. n° 5:716-726.
(1859) Aldrovanda vesiculosa MONTI. Bot. Ztg. 17:1 17-150.

(1862) Aldrovanda vesiculosa. Bot. Ztg. 20:185-206.

CHANDA (1965) The pollen morphology of Droseraceae with special reference to
taxonomy. Pollen et Spores 7:509-528.

CHANDLER (1964) The Lower Tertiary flora of England. IV. A summary and survey of
findings. . . Bull. Br. Mus. (Nat. Hist.) Geol. 12:1-151.

DEGREEF, J.D. (1988) Aldrovanda vesiculosa. Booklet published by the French C.P.S.
“DIONEE”.

DESBIEZ, M.O. & CHAMPAGNAT, P. & BOYER, N. & FRACHISSE, J.M. &
GASPAR, Th. & THELLIER, M. (1983). Inhibition correlative de la croissance de
Hiypocotyle de Bidens pilosus L. par des traumatismes cotyledonaires legers. Bull. Soc.
Bot. Fr. 130 (Actual bot.) 3/4:67-77.

DEXHEIMER, Jean (1978) Localisation ultrastructurale des phosphatases acides (phos-
phomonoesterases acides — dans les ce cellules des glandes digestives du Drosera
capensis L. pendant la synthese de mucilage. Rev. Cytol. Biol, veget. - Bot. 1:49-57.
DIELS, L. (1906) Droseraceae in:A. ENGLER (ed.) Das Pflanzenreich. Leipzig.
DIPALM A, J.R. & McMICHAEL, R. & DIPALMA, M. (1966) Touch receptor of Venus
flytrap Dionaea muscipula. Science Vol. 152:539-540.

FABIAN-GALAN, G. & SALAGEANU, N. (1968) Considerations on the nutrition of
certain carnivorous plants (Drosera capensis and Aldrovanda vesiculosa). Rev. Roum.
Biol., ser. Bot., Vol. 13 n° 3:275-280. (through CPN 1 n° 1:10).

FENNER, C.A. (1904) Beitraege zur Kenntnis der Anatomie, Entwicklungsgeschichte und
Biologie der Laubblaetter und Druesen einiger Insektivoren. Flora 93:335-434.
HABERLANDT, Gottlieb (1906) Sinnesorgane im Pflanzenreich. ... V. Insektivoren:

Dionaea muscipula. CPN 11 (1982) n°l:9 sq.

1 1 JIM A, Toshio & SIBAOKA, Takao( 1981) Action potentials in the Trap-lobes -& -(1982)
Propagation of action potential over Trap-lobes of Aldrovanda vesiculosa. PI. & Cell
Physiol. 23 ° 4:679-688.

JUNIPER, Barry E. (1987) The Path to Plant Carnivory. (summary by J.A. MAZRIMAS).
CPN 16 ° 2:54-57.

KAMINSKI, Richard (1984) unpublished research kindly communicated by Jacques
HALDI (Geneva), see in: DEGREEF, 1988.

KONDRAT’IEV, G.K. (1973) Pyl’tsa novykh vidov Aldrovanda iz Eotsienia Priangar’ia.
Bot. Zhurn. (Leningrad) 58 n° 6:878-879.

KORZCHINSKY, S. ( 1 887) Materialy k geografii i biologii Aldrovanda vesiculosa L. Trudy
Obsch. jestestv. Kazansk. univ. 17:1-98.

KRESS, Alfred (1970) Zytotaxonomische Untersuchungen an einigen Insektenfaengem.
Ber. Dtsch. Bot. Ges. 83 ° 2:55-62.

KRUTSCH (1970) Zur Kenntnis fossiler disperser Tetradenpollen. Palaeontol. Abb.
B-3:399-433.

124

Carnivorous Plant Newsletter

INSECT-EATING PLANTS
AND HOW TO GROW THEM

By Adrian Slack

Alpha Books 1986

Reviewed by Peter D 'Amato

P.O. Box 1372, Guerneville, CA 95446 • (707) 869-3641

It is truly difficult to find fault with a book as marvelous as this, a publication
carnivorous plant enthusiasts have long been waiting for. Many hobbyists have considered
Mr. Slack’s 1979 Carnivorous Plants their “bible”, but this book, already out for a few years
and still rare in some countries, renders pages of previous horticultural supplements found in
other CP books obsolete. Mr. Slack has composed a neat and tidy little book, bursting at the
seams with information. It should reign number one among the shelves of collectors for quite
some time to come.

Of course the thrill of Insect- Eating Plants is the subtitle And How To Grow Them. As
Mr. Slack explains in his introduction, his first book was a biology of CP, while this
publication is dedicated solely to their culture. The author passes on vast information on
hundreds of varieties now in cultivation from many seasoned growers from around the
world, including his own quarter of a century of experience. Mr. Slack’s love of these plants
leaps out at you, and his engaging style is captivating from the start. The book is well
organized, to the point, colorful, and fun to read.

There are over 60 pages of photographs in this volume, all in color and many by Slack
himself. Most are startling in their beauty, and offer visual feats of rare CP such as:
Please see PLANTS on page 126.

( 1 970) Die stratigraphisch verwertbaren Sporen- und Pollenformen des mitteleuro-
paeischen Alttertiaers. Jahrb. Geol. Bot. 3:309-379.

LEAVITT, Robert G. (1909) Seedlings and adventitious plants of Drosera.
Torreya IX:200-202.

LLOYD, Francis E. (1942) The Carnivorous Plants. Chronica Botanica, Waltham, Mass.
PIETROPAOLO, J. & P.A. (1974) World of Carnivorous Plants. Peter Pauls Nurseries,
Canandaigua, N.Y.

SAH & DUTTA (1974) Palynostratigraphy of the sedimentary formation of Assam. 3.
Biostratigraphic zonation of the Cherra formation of S. Shillong Plateau. The Palaeo-
botanist 21:42-47.

SAHASHI, N. & IKUSE, M. (1973) Pollen morphology of Aldrovanda vesiculosa L. J. Jap.

Bot. 48:374-379. (through CPN 1 (1972) n° 4:61-62).

SLACK, Adrian (1979) Carnivorous Plants. Sherborne, Dorset.

SNYDER, Ivan (1985) Evolution of the Venus Fly Trap. CPN 15 n° 4:108-109.
TERMIER, Henri & Genevieve (1979) Histoire de la Terre. Presses universitaires de France,
Paris.

TRUSWELL, E.M. & MARCHANT, N.G. (1986) Early Tertiary pollen of probable
Droseracean affinity from Central Australia. Spec. Pap. Palaeontol, 0(35): 161-1 76.
WILLIAMS, Stephen E. ( 1 982) Endnotes after: HABERLANDT, 1906. CPN 11 n° 2:36-38.
WILLIAMS, S.E. & PICKARD, Barbara G. (1972) Receptor Potentials and Action
Potentials in Drosera tentacles. Planta (Berl.) 103:193-221.

& - - (1974) Connections and barriers between cells of Drosera

tentacles in relation to their electrophysiology. Planta (Berl.) 116:1-16.

ZAHL, Paul A. (1961) Plants that Eat Insects. Nat. Geogr. Vol. 119 n°5:643-659.

Volume 17 • December 1988

125

PLANTS continued from page 125.

Sarracenia X ‘Daniel Rudd’, one of the author’s many creations and considered his favorite;
Robert Cantley’s haunting " Nepenthes rajah with frog”; Sarracenia flava ‘Burgundy’.
Slack’s own line drawings are a handsome addition, particularly of the Nepenthes.

Perhaps the most accomplished feat of Mr. Slack is the transformation of the
carnivorous plant hobby from an obscure and curious novelty to a mature horticultural art
form. If Slack has his way, no longer will CP be confined to blaclc plastic pots hidden in
greenhouses: they will boldly decorate household windowsills, add color and intrigue to the
garden, and find their status elevated to the heights of the African Violet, as Slack
confidently predicts for the Pinguicula. His designs of outdoor bog gardens are clever, and
the decorating of pots of sundews with tufa rock, for example, show taste and creativity. His
seriousness shows a much needed discipline in the world of CP, as when he claims “that, as
with the rose, the horticultural future of Sarracenia lies mainly with hybrids”, or his belief
that only one of perhaps 3000 hybrid seedlings might be elevated to the status of cultivar. His
opinions punctuate the text often amusingly in that already familiar Slack style: “ . . . and the
unspeakable-sounding and unspeakable-looking S. X umlauftiana ...” Indeed! He
attempts to clear up some misconceptions as well, as in the cultivars S. flava ‘Maxima 'and 5.
X willissii.

There are a few typographical errors, but even these are overshadowed by the attractive
format of the book. While Slack complains of lack of space limiting his description of
Sarracenia hybrids, more than half a page is left stark blank at the end of the section, where
much desired text could easily fit. A nice addition would have been some more words on
public displays, flower shows, and societies, for this is how the hobby gains recognition. And
why didn’t the author or publisher advertise the publication of this fine volume in, for
example, CPN? There has also been some confusion on where to order the book.

Nonetheless, no enthusiast will be disappointed in this little gem, and as the hobby grows,
one hopes we can look forward to future volumes on even more detailed subjects by Mr.
Slack, such as a book exclusively on the sundews and butterworts, or one fully dedicated to
the pitcher plants. So it was with pleasure to hear that Drosera ‘Highland Red’, a sundew
discovered by Frank Woodvine and popularized by Slack in this book and through his
Marston Exotics, was named by Martin Cheek in his description of the plant as D. slackii, a
nice compliment to a man who has done so much in the popularization of these wonderful
plants. This book is still available from:

University of Washington Press

P.O. Box 50096

Seattle, Washington 98145 $19.95 (800)441-4115

Artist, Author, Correspondents and Photographer Index

Baumgartl, W.: 36
Bednar, B.L.: 24
Bruynickx, K.: 24
Burdic, D.M.: 5
C. Cellucci: 77
Cheek, M.: 27

D’Amato, P.: 1,15, 32, 36, 25,
76

Degreef, J.D.: 80,91, 106, 119
DeLosada, B.: 37
Dennison, L.: 4
Dodd, C.: 20, 48, 49
Dwyer, P.: 3, 35, 75, 105
Editor: 35, 117
Eickhoff, D.W.: 99
Bley, F.: 74

Fleming, R.: 8, 23, 54, 55, 63
Gibson, T.C.: 33, 47,64, 84

Hanrahan, B.: 52, 56, 108
Hauser, R.: 109
Hearn, J.: 105
Hochberg, M.: 42
Hoelter, R.: 22
Homick, M.: 4
James, G.: 102, 103
Kite, P.: 99

Knees, S. & M. Cheek: 45
Lamb, R.: 42

Maharajh, R.B.: 36, 99, 105
Maulder, R.: 100
Mazrimas, J.A.: 6, 22, 26, 29,
37, 57, 58,60,61, 101
Mellichamp, T.L.: 21,35
Mrkvica, A.: 38, 67
Phillipps, A.: 55
Powell II, C.: 16, 17,42,65,96

Rice, B.: 78
Robinson, J.T.: 20
Schnell, D.E.: 3, 28, 40, 43, 58,
73, 85,95, 97, 104, 118, 128
Seed Bank: 3, 35, 75, 105
Shomin, R.: 1 14, 1 16
Snelling, G.C.: 67
Song, L.: 62
Strand, B.: 90
Studnicka, M.: 12, 13
Studnickova, R.: 14
Tilbrooke, R.D.: 41, 106, 107,
110, 112, 113
Toribio, G.: 69
VanWinkle, W.B.: 101
Verdavaine, P.: 69
Wexler, J.: 56
Wong, D.: 39
Ziemer, R.R.: 70-73

126

Carnivorous Plant Newsletter

Title Index

1988 CP Sources . 29

1988 List of CP Books . 26

A Field Trip to Mendocino . 15

A Further Note on Nepenthes rajah Cultivation . 84

A New Drosera from the Section Arachnopus? . 12

A Practical Method for Cultivation of Heliamphora spp . . . . .48

A Second Record of Rats as Prey in Nepenthes rajah . 55

A Summary of WIP’S Past & Future Directives . 56

A Varying Lighting Scheme & its Effects on Some Easily Grown CPs . 78-79

Addendum (The Electrochemical Mechanisms of Trap Closure in Dionaea muscipula) . . 106

Assessment of Natural CP Populations by a Commercial Grower . 52

Book Review . 21

Book Review (A Focus on Peatlands & Peat Mosses) . 118

Book Review-Insect Eating Plants & How to Grow Them . 125

Carnivorous Plants of Australia; Vol. I . 27

Changes in Regulations Effecting International Trade in CP . 45

Cites, Traffic, USFW - Are you Caught in the Alphabet Soup? . 43

Completion of the Fuqua Conservatory in the Atlanta Bot. Gar . 73-75

Continuous Growth of Tuberous Drosera? . 41

CP Communications-Creation of a New Society Program? . 108

CP in Micronesia . 70-73

CPN Reader Survey Results . 58, 85-90

CPN Seed Bank Species Receipt & Distribution Limitations . 3

Depth with Perspective 3D Photography . 1 10

Drosera pauciflora, Queen of Sundews . 76-77

Electrochemical Mechanism of Trap Closure in Dionaea Muscipula . 80-83; 91-95

For the Record (errata) . 24, 35, 117

Literature Review . 28, 40, 95, 109

New CP Cultivar Received in 1987 . 20

On the Care & (not) Feeding of D. adelae, prolifera & schizandra . 22

On the Cultivation of Drosera linearis . 114

On the Cultivation of the South American Pitcherplant, Heliamphora neblinae . 47

Propagation & Culture of Western North American CP . 5

Proposed Listing of 5. rubra ssp. alabamensis as an Endangered Species Under the US

Endangered Species Act . 104

Scape & Axil Cuttings of Drosophyllum . 106

Seed Bank . 3, 35, 75, 105

Some Observations of a Population of N. Madagasgariensis in Madagascar . 102

Special Announcement-Vendor Update . 109

T.L. Mellichamp, CPN Co-editor . 35

The Evolution of Aldrovanda & Dionaea Traps . . . ..119

Tidbits . 90

Want Ads . 4, 24, 36, 42, 105

Coming in 1989

• CP of Auyan-Tepui in Venezuela.

• Tuberous Drosera

• Early history of Drosera and Drosophyllum

• Evolutionary patterns in Drosera.

Volume 17 • December 1988

127