Cephalotus: Are There Really Any Cultivars?

Cephalotus in the Wild

I read with some interest Richard Nunn's article on Cephalotus cultivars from the March 2014 ICPS Newsletter. In it, he concludes "[a] simple comparison between C. follicularis and Dionaea and Sarracenia cultivars shows that the latter hold true to form when basic conditions such as light, temperature, and water levels are met, i.e. a Sarracenia 'Adrian slack' tends to look the same for most growers who have a basic idea of how to grow them, the same cannot be said for C. follicularis." In other words, there's not such thing as a real Cephalotus cultivar.

Wow! If Richard is right, the three registered cultivars - 'Eden Black', 'Hummer's Giant', and 'Clayton's T Rex' - and the countless unregistered cultivars actually are just created via differences in growers habitat.

To support this conclusion, Richard points to the fact that he and Phill Mann have been trying to find stable variations of Cephalotus in the wild, but plants from different sites that look different in the field invariably end up reverting to the mean in cultivation. The only differences occur, it seems, because the plants are reacting to their micro-habitats, and Cephalotus is, as anyone who has tried to grow it knows, "very reactive to its micro habitat."

Further, apparently, there is copious evidence online that cultivars - registered and not - are actually not all that different, once they become exposed to different conditions. And, in many cases, the collector-as-province of the plants, where provided, is even less valuable as, though it may be marked by the original collector's name, those collectors (Phill Mann and Allen Lowrie) have not kept separate clonal lines separate, but have plants all mixed up. As a consequence, the only real province-marking that is valuable is location data, which is a common trend with Sarracenia, Nepenthes, and Drosera.

I have to say, this is one of the most interesting things I've found in the Carnivorous Plant Newsletter in recent memory. Quite a good argument against Cephalotus cultivars.