My $0.02: After spending four long days rummaging through the
summit vegetation, I beleive that this is indeed a pure species.
Here's why:
1. I did not find any evidence to support the claim that this is
a hybrid. Not only is the plant quite homogenous (I have seen
hundreds which differed only in coloration) over its entire
distribution on the mountain (roughly 6900' to 7940') but, for
much of this range, it is far more abundant than any possible
parental species, such as N. tentaculata, and grows in some areas
(such as the "rock garden") where none of the latter species is
to be found. I do not beleive that N. muluensis could be a
parent species because of the sessile leaf attachment and the
relatively small pitchers.
2. In places where it does grow alongside N. tentaculata (such as
near the church at about 7000'), the two species remain distinct
and I did not observe a single hybrid or variation between the
two. I observed many N. "murudiensis" plants in flower and bud,
but all the N. tentaculata had already developed greatly swollen
seedpods.
3. There are several differences in the morphology of these two
species which I feel are significant. Besides the large size of
N. "murudiensis" upper pitchers, they also lack wings (which are
present in N. tentaculata) and posess a differently shaped lid,
pitcher mouth, and spur. The pecuilarly shaped lower pitchers of
N. "murudiensis" display even greater discrepancies from those of
N. tentaculata. There are also differences in the stems and the
veination of the leaves.
>Contrary to the statement there is n. reinwardtiana on the
>mountain. We found them exhibiting the telltale twin eyes on the
>ridge going up to Chuch Camp... at elevations of 2100 meter.
I did not see any N. reinwardtiana anywhere on the mountain. How
many is "them" and were the leaves decurrent? I have seen N.
tentaculata varieties (such as in Sulawesi) which sometimes have
eyespots on the back of the throat exactly as in N.
reinwardtiana. It may be possible that this trait can be
displayed occasionally in other species which are closely
related.
On a similar note:
I have not yet received my copy of the new nepenthes book but
have heard that Phillips & Lamb revised their statement about the
N. veitchii x fusca hybrid on G. Murud, a species which is also
doubtless not a hybrid. Has anyone made a decision on what
species this is?
BTW, John: your scribble is still written in the guestbook of the
Green Valley Inn...
Best wishes,
Ch'ien