Carnivorous Plants: books and other media

[unclemasa]

Carnivorous Plants: books and other media

[rainforest]

A new nepenthes/PP book is on its way to many eager hands, yet I have found a few errors obvious to even a beginner.
www.redfernnaturalhistory.com/showphotos/442/500
Shows a photo of N. truncata but labeled N. ventricosa.

And for those who didn't believe something could be named as futile as N. flava, we now have a N. alba. Go figure!~

M

[twoton]

It's actually two books: Volume One and Two. From the looks of it, it might dethrone Clarke's and Lee's photographical work and become the new standard for plant porn.

What's nepenthes alba? The only thing I found was an old name for N. gracilis.

[rainforest]

I simply cannot understand why they could not split N. globosa from N. mirabilis, yet in this book, they are able to separate so many varieties or forms of a species.

It appears like this book might be a vehicle for new propaganda of "new" nepenthes species.
I'm a little ticked off that something as simple as N. truncata can be misidentified as N. ventricosa this loses the fact that the names for this book might be somewhat off as well. The leaf shown in the photo appears to be truncate as well. Interesting!

M

[agustinfranco]

Hi all:

With regards to Mr. Macpherson's books, well, it's about time someone else take the lead on describing carnivorous plants, especially Nepenthes which are my favourite cp's.
I don't want to point my finger at anyone, but i can honestly tell you all that some of those well-known cp book authors are shying away from publishing new findings because either they don't have the time to do it or they are not really passionate about it anymore.
I am very glad that people like Mr. Stewart Macpherson is making a tremendous effort to come up with high quality publications in this area which, in a way, keeps the interest for these plants very much alive.

With regards to mistakes, well, if we look at the Nepenthes of Borneo book, we see Nepenthes rajah X Kinabaluensis on the cover named Nepenthes rajah and so forth.
Therefore, to err is human to forgive is divine!.

Furthermore, names like N. alba are not new but they are brough back to life, as
done by Martin Jebb (Flora malesiana) page 69 who cites Ridl 1924. In other words, some people's imagination to name plants or the lack of it was present in 1924 and not on 2008; thus, it's unfair to criticise the name as the author just attempts to cite findings based on previously published scientific data.

Gus

[sockhom]

Hello .

I've just made an introduction on Stewart's site and work here:

www.lhnn.proboards107.com/index.cgi?board=pforum&action=display&thread=2278

Don't be too harsh on Mac Pherson: the truncata/ventricosa is just a careless mistake. It can happen to any of us ;D.
Having read his three books, having exchanged many mails with Stew and having met him, I can assure all of you that he knows what he talks about!

Stew intends to reinstate N. alba first described by Ridley along with N. gracillima. Danser has synonymised both species but Stew did find another species (not a hybrid) growing on the same mountain: according to him, it is the true gracillima.

I will ask Stew if I have permission to develop further.

Just check the pictures of N. alba/N. gracillima on the links I gave.


François.

[rainforest]

Perhaps he should have sent the proofs to Nate before having them published.
truncata/ventricosa is too vastly different for it to be confused. Funny how you can differentiate gracillima from alba when they look so closely allied, yet well known species that have been around with familiarity can get mistaken identity.
This will no doubt add to further confusion in this already confusing hobby.
I still see people write names like N. bicalacarata in places taken from another book in the trade. I look forward to seeing people call N. truncata with the name of ventricosa labeled with it.

M

[sockhom]

Shhh... forgive me but you're being petty on that one . I sometimes call my elder girl by using the name of the younger... and viceversa
Once, while introducing the hobby to some friends, I explained that N. khasiana was growing in Sri lanka before I correct myself a few moments later .
MacPherson has uploaded hundreds of pictures... and I guess he has switched in his mind the two Philippines species. Nothing more, nothing less.

Hey, those thing happens!
Besides the books are not published. The mistake is on the site. It seems the name has been corrected (check the link you provided).


François.


PS: I hope "petty" does not sound mean. English is not my mother language.

[stewart]

Dear member of this forum,

Rainforest - thank you for pointing out the mistake on one of the images on my website.

You are quite correct, I entered the wrong subject line for that one specific image. I had to upload 700 photos in two days before I left for Cape York last week and obviously this one mistake obviously slipped by. I believe it is now corrected, thank you for bringing it to my attention.

Over the next few months I will be uploading at least two thousand more Nepenthes and CP images to www.redfernnaturalhistory.com and I hope you will enjoy them.

Regarding Nepenthes alba and Nepenthes gracillima, I visited the type localities of these two plants recently.

There are significant morphological differences between these plants, especially in terms of the lower pitchers and I will present my argument for this case in Pitcher Plants of the Old World. I believe the specimens in Singapore and my observations in the wild form a compelling argument that these plants should be regarded as seperate species, as they were originally described.

I look forward to hearing your thoughts once you have read my argument. I am writing Pitcher Plants of the Old World at the moment and am working on a release date at the end of this year / early new year. It has been literally three years of continuous field research and I sincerely hope you will enjoy the result. The images on my site at the moment, are only a sample of the content of the book.

My very best regards to you and all members of the forum

Stewart McPherson

[unclemasa]

Welcome stewart ....

We anxiously await your books and arguments.

[twoton]

truncata/ventricosa is too vastly different for it to be confused.

Jeez, Mike, lighten up already. People confuse stuff all the time, and being an expert on CP, a world-class photographer, and all kinds of other glamorous things doesn't mean Stewart ain't human. Like François, I call my two boys the wrong names all the time, errare humanum est. And why all the anger? Couldn't you just have pointed it out politely as an aside?

I write for a living, and nothing ticks me off more than typos or mistakes in printed books. But I've learned to control my anger, because the next publication error that comes to my attention might very well come from my own pen. Pet peeves sure add color to one's character, but when they start irritating the neighbors one should step back, have another look at them and decide whether they're really worth all that energy.

Cheers

Hans

[rainforest]

Greetings and welcome Stewart,
Don't get me wrong when I criticize some points, but in a day and age where a simple mistake is published, this can set back many newer generations of nepenthiphiles in thinking misleading names and images. To this day, I still see so many misleading names attributed from Exotica/Tropica and I would hope that a treatise on a specific genera could end all. But I guess I am living in a dream world of scholarly expectations. There is so much to think about: grammar, photo quality, spelling of names, and so on, that it is very difficult to get every thing done to "perfection!"
I am neither a splitter or clumper when it comes to species, but I would love to see species get recognized as species and others which are just variational be kept as such. To me, the N. mirabilis subtribe needs serious organization. The separation of rowanae is an excellent example, yet N. m. echinostoma isn't recognized even while it too comes from a specific region even as rowanae commensalates with mirabilis, so do N. m. echinostoma grow side by side with mirabilis as well. N. globosa comes from a specific region and again, also commensalates with N. mirabilis, yet is tretaed as the same taxon.

N. alba and gracillima is not that different more so than N. globosa and mirabilis!

I would love to see your argument between alba and gracillima, but please keep in mind that the same arguments cementing globosa with mirabilis will also be scrutinized.

I would have really liked to have seen Nepenthes be kept in regional divisions (f.ex. by Island/Subcontinent, etc.) and how each species are in affiliation with it. There is dire need for a compilation of nepenthes species of the Philippine Islands that needs more work and recognition. I feel that like Sumatra and Borneo, the Philippines is another epicenter for species, and many many newer species will soon be discovered in this very varied array of islands. I would not be amazed if the Philippine Islands will outnumber many newer endemic species in the coming years. There exists many unexplored territory and areas which are still today impenetrable and off-limits.

But I must say that your photos are very well done. While many photograph nepenthes by pitcher close-up, your photos actually shows their environment and often leaf attachment and plant affiliates. This refreshing look is more to my tastes than many other photos that just show pitchers alone.

Look forward to your arguments and philosophies on the alba/gracillima species.

Michael Miyashiro

[cloudsitter]

Thank you Stewart for putting in the time and effort for these books. I have thrived off of nature documentaries and books similar but pertaining to other biology (Mollusks, Fish, Amphibians, Reptiles, etc.) and have always focused on the in depth to the topic with many exquisite photos. So thank you I look forward to reading your findings and arguments.