Aquatic Plant Forum banner
41 - 60 of 65 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,438 Posts
nearly all of the specimens of smaller species I've seen have them as coming from stream banks and seasonally flooded areas.
Interesting; for Cook perhaps not "aquatic enough". It's surely difficult to draw the line between aquatic and non-aquatic. Maybe some Staurogyne species are rheophytes. On the picture of the habitat of Staurogyne sp. on the Tropica homepage inflorescences of Podostemaceae are visible, too.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
7,423 Posts
Interesting; for Cook perhaps not "aquatic enough". It's surely difficult to draw the line between aquatic and non-aquatic. Maybe some Staurogyne species are rheophytes. On the picture of the habitat of Staurogyne sp. on the Tropica homepage inflorescences of Podostemaceae are visible, too.
Yes, I think a lot of them are. In his book on the wetland flora of India, Cook specifically mentions that he has excluded rheophytes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
100 Posts
hi all.

interesting thread.

I was the one who sent out Staurogyne from Tropica to a few select users from various board.

Now I have all 4 staurogyne.

The original... or the Tropica one is different from the 3 others circulating in the US (and elsewhere)

Tropica is still trying to determine if:

1. The plant from tropica actually is a Staurogyne or if in fact is is a Hygrophila... I think we're about 99-1% but it's still not 100%.

Low grow is larger than the tropica sp. and the 2 others are out of the question..

There are hundreds of staurogyne as far as I know... but only very few are aquatic or semi-aquatic..

For many months we believed(tropica) that staurogyne wasn't truly aquatic... but it persisted to grow submerged...

The work being done here to remove all the confusing labels such as 'porto velho' 'japan' 'greenspotted' blablabla is wonderful.

Claus from Tropica did mention that it would be a great help to receive samples of the other Staurogyne in the hobby.

I will certainly provide what I can from the plants I received from a board member here, but perhaps others might 'chip in' ?

Anyway, just trying to help :)
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
7,423 Posts
Currently being circulated:
- Tropica species
- S. stolonifera
-'Porto Velho'/'Roraima'
-'Low Grow' (I know what species this may be)
- a new, small purplish one
-'Bihar'? (most likely a Staurogyne)
-S. leptocaulis (not in US yet, as far as I know)

The species Tropica sells is certainly not a Hygrophila; once you know what to look for, Staurogyne are pretty easy to spot, especially if you can flower them. There are quite a few potentially useful species in South America, most of which seem to occupy similar habitats.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
100 Posts
I agree that they're easy to spot.. so to speak, but..

Tropica is running DNA analysis and so far it's been, as I wrote, 99% sure, but not quite.. there are some small issues with the analysis that leaves a little doubt..

Similarly I have a Pogostemon which, until it flowered was 100% a Rotala.. I had no doubt..... I was quite surprised..

The leaf texture, as you pointed out, is 1 thing, the flower is another.. but DNA analysis is the dead sure way..
it is for this analysis that Tropica needs samples of other potential staurogynes..
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
7,423 Posts
There is always some doubt as to what things are. Just a teeny, tiny amount, but pretty much always. If all the necessary characters are present, you can be confident of what something is. For example, the expert who helped us identify what we thought might have been Acisanthera said before DNA testing that it was probably Aciotis, and it turned out - no surprise - that he was right, the point being that DNA testing is good confirmation but not always totally necessary.

I assume you're talking about Pogostemon erectum. It does look a lot like a Rotala, but to his credit, Aaron from our club did say a while ago that he thought it might be Pogostemon, even before we flowered it. :eek:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,096 Posts
Discussion Starter · #49 ·
I think it's great that more people are trying to correctly ID plants. The fact that Tropica has access to DNA analysis is a plus. Keep us updated on what Tropica finds out Martin!
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
7,423 Posts
What do You all think of temporarily calling the plant from Tropica "Staurogyne sp. 'Rio Cristalino'", after the locality?
It might be more accurate, but the danger there is that it would be another name attached to the plant. I think the less names attached to a species, the better, scientific or otherwise. Working to find out the species and going with that might be better?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
100 Posts
actually I just received a plant list which lists staurogyne sp. rio cristallino... so the name is already in use..

Using locality to distinguish the plants is much much better than Rotala sp. 'pearl' or similar.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
7,423 Posts
actually I just received a plant list which lists staurogyne sp. rio cristallino... so the name is already in use..

Using locality to distinguish the plants is much much better than Rotala sp. 'pearl' or similar.
I agree, assuming the provenance is correct. I guess I'll put the Staurogyne in the Plant Finder with the name of the location, unless someone is really close to an ID...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
100 Posts
you are referring to the tropica staurogyne.. adding sp. rio cristallino?

I suggest holding off doing this.. since this plant is already known, it might cause more confusion...?

or?

Honestly I cannot know that the staurogyne offered on the list is infact the Tropica one.. but I'm definetely ordering one :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
100 Posts
Yesterday I sent Staurogyne stolonifera to a DNA sampling to compare with the Tropica Staurogyne and hopefully confirm that the Staurogyne from Tropica is in fact a Staurogyne, and more importantly, what specific speicies it is.

hold the drumroll a bit yet. :)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,096 Posts
Discussion Starter · #57 ·
I need to get me a botanist friend :)

It's cool you guys work on this, the more forward we move with correct ID's the better.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
Hello,

The Staurogyne leptocaulis I have been keeping here in the NT of Australia is a common local plant that usually grows close to the water in shady places along the stream bank. It flowers and sets seed after the wet season when it becomes exposed by falling water levels. It is usually squat in habit and grows much larger leaves when growing in a submerged state. the information I have about this plant comes from personal observations and the book "Floodplain Flora" written by local NT Botanists Ian Cowie, Phil Short and illustrated by Monica Osterkamp Madsen. The plant is in the family ACANTHACEAE which worldwide has 2500 species and 250 genera including Hygrophila. In Australia there are 15 genera and 60 species. This book looks at four genera, Acanthus, Nelsonia, Hygrophila and Staurogyne. The Staurogyne genera has 80 species found in tropical regions of Africa, America, Asia and Australia. The S.leptocaulis is the only one in Australia. It is a subspecies Staurogyne leptocaulis decumbens with Staurogyne leptocaulis leptocaulis subspecies confined to New Guinea. I will try to dig up some more recent pictures of the local NT subspecies.

Cheers
Dave
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,438 Posts
On the 'Rio Cristalino' issue again:

I have to admit, the less name changes, the better.
I didn't know that the species identity of the Staurogyne sp. from Tropica is almost clear.
But assuming this wouldn't be the case and an ID wouldn't be in sight, I would consider the addition 'Rio Cristalino' being a better placeholder than the unspecific "sp." alone.
At least in Germany there is already some confusion about the identity of Staurogyne sp. and Staurogyne sp. 'Porto Velho' (the latter is probably hardly present in Germany). A company and some traders offer a "Porto Velho" that seems to be actually the Rio Cristalino type.
But even if the species of the Tropica-Staurogyne is identified, a name addition 'Rio Cristalino' could be useful. E.g. if the species is variable, or there are taxonomical problems. Provided that the Tropica-Staurogyne and S. sp. 'Low Grow' are really different under same conditions: what if they turn out to be the same species? Then I would call them Staurogyne XY 'Rio Cristalino' and Staurogyne XY 'Low Grow' in order to distinguish these forms.
 
41 - 60 of 65 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top