Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1999 09:14:10 From: SCHLAUER@chemie.uni-wuerzburg.de To: email@example.com Message-Id: <aabcdefg849$foo@default> Subject: Re: N. curtisii revisited
> Can you validate the origin as Sulawesi?
Only by circumstantial evidence. The plant illustrated by Masters
does look like plants from Celebes. However, _N. maxima_ is
excessively variable in New Guinea, and forms like those from Celebes
might occur there as well. On the other hand, the British were not
very active in Papua New Guinea (Irian Jaya was Dutch and almost
terra incognita - but cf. collections by Beccari - at that time), so
it is most likely that the plant was originally collected in
(likewise Dutch) Celebes by "someone" (not necessarily Curtis
himself) and imported by Curtis to England.
> I had heard that a number of Nepenthes
> were collected there at the same time as the expedition to Borneo, and that
> it was confused in the shuffle getting the plants to England.
This is very well possible. At least it is the most likely
> Do we continue to call it N. curtisii?
You may. The name is valid. But you should keep in mind that most
taxonomists today consider it a synonym of _N. maxima_ (there is no
feature that distinguishes it from the type of _N. maxima_, which
was likewise described from Celebes). So it is not a name widely
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Jan 02 2001 - 17:31:55 PST