N. rajah

CBelan9630@aol.com
Tue, 10 Oct 1995 18:42:47 -0400

>It's N.rajah for sure-looks just like the photos in Cheers' second
>book that go with N.rajah notes. BTW, did anyone notice that some
>of the photo labelled as N.villosa in that same book are really N.
>rajah instead?

They are not even N. rajah, they are N.x kinabaluensis the hybrid between the
two. There are two good N. villosa pictures on p. 105, the other is N. x
kinabaluensis. The same goes for p. 101. There is 1 good picture of N.
rajah (bottom right) the other is N. x kinabaluensis. Even the ID of the
plants labled as N. gymnamphora is very questionable.

Christoph