Ibicellism, once again?

From: SCHLAUER@chemie.uni-wuerzburg.de
Date: Wed Apr 05 2000 - 17:39:00 PDT


Date:          Wed, 5 Apr 2000 17:39:00 
From: SCHLAUER@chemie.uni-wuerzburg.de
To: cp@opus.hpl.hp.com
Message-Id: <aabcdefg1022$foo@default>
Subject:       Ibicellism, once again?

Dear Hideka,

> Supposedly, this species had specialized
> leaves which appeared to be trap-like, but the evidence was inconclusive.

The glandular structures were originally termed "ligules", but I am
quite convinced they are root-derived, non-foliar organs. They are
not particularly similar to the true ligules found e.g. in the
grasses, and related orchid species do have roots at similar positions
(a short distance above the point of insertion of leaves) on the
internodes.

> There was no mention on digestive enzymes. I am curious if anyone
> knows more on this.

_Aracamunia_ was collected only once. It is rather difficult to
reach Cerro Aracamuni (cf. the close and likewise inaccessible C.
Neblina), and the plant appears to be very local. The people who have
seen it alive did obviously not speculate about carnivory at all,
nor did they investigate any enzymes (I guess they were busy enough
with collecting and preserving specimens so the plants could at
least be described properly).

Further data from living specimens are clearly required. But even if
the "ligules" were able to trap animals and to absorb organic matter,
_Aracamunia_ would probably represent another borderline case like
the bromeliads, because you can expect roots to secrete mucilage and
to absorb organic matter (this is what many roots are able to do).
The special feature of the carnivorous plants known so far is that
they have transformed their *leaves* into traps, which does not seem
to be the case here.

Once again, endogenous digestive activity would be an important
condition for carnivory, and this would be difficult to assay under
"dirty" in situ conditions. Lots of work ahead, I'm afraid. But I am
rather confident that _Aracamunia_ will manage its way into the
smalltalk sections of "specialist" books even without the tiniest bit
of reproducible experimental evidence. It is just too exotic and
tempting, and some people simply cannot wait to publish the
sensational (even if it was not true).

Kind regards
Jan



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Jan 02 2001 - 17:35:07 PST