(no subject)

Jan Schlauer (Jan@pbc-ths1.pci.chemie.uni-tuebingen.de)
Thu, 25 Apr 1996 09:22:28 +0100

Dear Peter,

> ... but it begs the question: why are these
> names in the DB if they refer to non-carnivorous plants? At
> least Roridula has a historical excuse for inclusion.

The inclusion of the (2) non-carnivorous members of Dioncophyllaceae does
not have any reason beyond taxonomic/nomenclatural completeness (the
sub-carnivorous species of Sarraceniaceae are included as well). No (other)
reason to worry.

Kind regards
Jan