I am wondering what it is ...marketing...new species...apology...Do you know?

Alberto,

Here's a page under developement with some info and pics.

http://www.palmpedia.net/wiki/index.php/T._princeps

Alberto, its a Trachycarpus growing wild in the Stonegate gorge, China, also home to Trachycarpus princeps.

Nobody realised there was 2 new species there.

Its the fastest growing Trachycarpus species in the world by some distance.

Nobody has yet formally classified it as a new species but it will come.

Picture taken last year by a Belgian guy who went to the Stonegate gorge to climb and take pictures.

Dear Nigel  

thanks for the still & it seems you are an expert in this fan palm species.and i know you are big importer into europe.

And it seems you are very good in your line of activity.Great Job !

love,

Kris  

Hi everyone,

according to genetic tests of a German laboratory the so called princeps "green" without the white undersites of the leaves (the fastest grower of the species) is just an ecotype of T. fortunei. I don't know if this is the same Trachy you're calling "Nova", I've never heard that name before.

This "green" variation that turned out to be fortunei is isolated growing in about the same area as Tr. princeps (Stonegate) and that was the reason why the seed collectors thought it must be princeps, too. I think those seeds were spread also by RPS in 2003 and 2004.

Regards, Rachel

Thank you specially for that photo,Nigel!Thank you Dean for the link, and Rachel for the interesting genetic info!

Alberto, there is a band of people in germany who want to split Trachycarpus into 3 species , fortunei , takil and martianus with everything else as variations.

They want to do this based on DNA.

So, do you classify plants based on the distance of variation between DNA or on physical characteristics of plants as it always has been done ?

Incidentally, the DNA tests showed the palm WAS a separate species in the view of somebody else. Its all about where you put the dividing line, what degree of variance do you allow ? How do you take account of hereditary characteristics not within the DNA itself ?

Do we really want the enjoyment taken out of the hobby with 1 species of Butia, 4 species of Dypsis, etc etc etc.

Anyway ,  thats my last post on this topic, I dont want to get involved again with these people.

yeah,  like there are only 2 species of Acrocomia ?

Hi Nigel,

I wasn't aware of it that my posting would cause such bad mood, it really wasn't my intention. Although I don't understand it, are different opinions not accepted here?

Alberto, there is a band of people in germany who want to split Trachycarpus into 3 species , fortunei , takil and martianus with everything else as variations.

Well, then we probably don't speak about the same people, I guess? The guys that made those tests do accept every Trachy species, including martianus, takil, fortunei, princeps, latisectus, naga hills, nanus, oreophilus...  

It was just that special variation of "princeps" that turned out to be an ecotype of fortunei.

So, do you classify plants based on the distance of variation between DNA or on physical characteristics of plants as it always has been done ?

Yes, that's a good question and not only relating to the Trachy species. But anyways, even the Trachy fortunei shows such big variety in its range of appearance, how do you want to put that dividing line without such tests and be sure about it?

I don't like that thought either that one day there could be only 3 or 4 different species in the Trachy family, but it's also very confusing to give every ecotype an extra name.

Like the naga hills species, which has currently 4 different officially names (naga hills, manipur, kalamuni and ukhrulensis). I think because of that confusion such tests could be very helpful.

Regards, Rachel

n/m

Is Naga hills now officially T.ukhrulensis?

Rachel,

Please feel free to post as you wish.

Taxonomy is a somewhat vague science, more so in light of the DNA analysis that has become available in recent years. An educated unbiased decision needs to be made as to what DNA differences are acceptable within a species. Beyond those, the species involved would be destinct. There is some resistance by those who are currently "experts" to accept a more regimented approach to the science.

Pekingese and Collies appear very different, but they're both still dogs.

(alex_7b @ Jul. 31 2007,07:51)

QUOTE

Rachel,

Please feel free to post as you wish.

Taxonomy is a somewhat vague science, more so in light of the DNA analysis that has become available in recent years. An educated unbiased decision needs to be made as to what DNA differences are acceptable within a species. Beyond those, the species involved would be destinct. There is some resistance by those who are currently "experts" to accept a more regimented approach to the science.

Pekingese and Collies appear very different, but they're both still dogs.

Can anybody independent please vouch for Rachel as a bona fide enthusiast ? The phrasology is far too familiar for my liking.

If anybody realised the trouble that happened on the Hardypalms board over this subject they would understand my concerns.

The use of pseudonyms is a very easy way to poison the debate.

I really dont want to become subject to a campaign of slander, insulting emails and targeting of my business contacts by this group again, for the crime of posting interesting information and holding my own opinion. Which incidentally Alex, I do for my love of palms , and enjoyment in sharing what I know, not for profiteering as you think. Thats why i dont want to discuss this topic again, because its been turned into something quite poisonous.

I am an electrical engineer; not a genetic engineer, microbiologist or taxonomist. I cannot say whether Trachycarpus is comprised of 5 species or 50. My only point (which was neutral) is that as our tools of the trade improve, so must our methodologies. That includes taxonomy as a science, as well.

At least for me, when I'm purchasing a palm I'd prefer there to be as many species as possible.  For example, if I purchase T. fortunei, will I end up with T. wagnerianus, the green T. "princeps", or what I think of as the standard T. fortunei?  From a landscaping point of view, they all look different even if they have similar enough traits/genes to be called the same species.  If they were all classified as different species then it would be easier to purchase the palm I want.  But, just because that makes it easier for growers and collectors doesn't mean that's the way it should be done.  I think it's great that botanists take the time to define species based on unbiased scientific criterea, including DNA.

(elHoagie @ Jul. 31 2007,13:34)

QUOTE

 I think it's great that botanists take the time to define species based on unbiased scientific criterea, including DNA.

So do I when the info is used constructively and properly.

Nigel,

In the midst of our year-long discourse, I have never really addressed you directly. I have spoken quite generally about how I view the classification process.

It finally occurred to me today that, there was likely some misunderstanding in something that I said (and implied). When I made the remark regarding "experts" having a commercial interest, I was not speaking of you. In fact, until the last day or two, I didn't realize that you were involved with the nursery (Bristol, right?). I was implying others whose word is taken as "gospel" but yet rely on procuremnt and sales to fund their hobby.

I quite recognize now how it appeared to have been directed at you. That was not my intent. I do not disbelieve what you have said regarding Trachycarpus; understand however, that those of us who dabble in the physical sciences are reliant upon measurable evidence.

.... .... .... ??? .... ..... ....    ? ? ? ? ? ? I think I have to read that topic at´´Hardy Palms´´ to understand what is going here.......

(alex_7b @ Jul. 31 2007,18:40)

QUOTE

I quite recognize now how it appeared to have been directed at you. That was not my intent. I do not disbelieve what you have said regarding Trachycarpus; understand however, that those of us who dabble in the physical sciences are reliant upon measurable evidence.

Alex, I have a passion not only for plants but for science as well. Whilst I cant consider myself an expert in anything I do have a fairly good understanding of basic science and biology.

What I do know , is that DNA analysis and subsequent plant classification is something that needs to be left to properly qualified people. It takes time and years of experience.

A person sat behind a computer in germany ,having sureptitously acquired DNA info and armed with a computer keyboard  , is not qualified to make those assessments, and to wage the kind of propaganda war that went on in order to try to make a name for himself at the expense of everybody else in the business.

Thats why the court in Germany muzzled him, and why I am horrified this subject is coming up again, and apparently coming out of germany again .....

I just want it left to the experts so we dont have to go through this online warfare again.

Trachycarpus sp nova has not been classified for a very good reason, this time its being left to the experts, and that takes a long time.

Can anybody independent please vouch for Rachel as a bona fide enthusiast ? The phrasology is far too familiar for my liking.

The use of pseudonyms is a very easy way to poison the debate.

I'm not in charge of those troubles about a "Hardypalms board", I don't even know that board. So please stop blaming people for things they aren't responsible for. I don't use pseudonyms, my real name is Rachel and you could verify it at RPS where I ordered my seeds from. This is absurd.

I posted here in best intentions and what is my current knowledge about the Trachycarpus family. I do not know the guys who made those tests and I'm not German! I'm  Swiss if do know the difference. But what I do know is that it was a biologist who made those tests and not anybody who wants to make a profit about it with any kind of shop or something. And that's what makes this guy more trustworthy for me than you, Nigel. I'm really sorry to say this, but the way you forced me in this debate is really absurd.

I do understand that you want to maintain your lifelihood, Nigel, but I can't understand your behaviour and the way you're treating and accusing people here.

Rachel

So.. uh..  does anyone who has a real T. princeps or a fakey know what the cultivation differences are?   E.g., sun tolerance, cold tolerance, heat tolerance, water needs/tolerance?  Ultimate height?

So far, my two (I believe real) T. princeps are enjoying all the water I can throw at them in summer.  They are quite small but already have the white on the back sides of the leaves.

One other question I have is whether the trunk of a mature palm is bare or retains leaf sheath fibers (hairy).  The articles I have read say either is possible.

Jason

Alex,

Please feel free to post as you wish.

Thank you.

Pekingese and Collies appear very different, but they're both still dogs.

yes I understand what you mean by this. I'm a dog lover and I have several half breeds and really don't care about their race. But if it comes to the survival of plants in a marginal area and I don't know if a species survives or not, I'm thankful about any kind of information. It makes a big difference if it's "just" a normal Trachy fortunei or any kind of other Trachy hybrid in my area, that's why I like to get some information about the plants I have in my garden. 2 winters ago we had less than 0 degrees F here after all.

Regards, Rachel

--------------

Los Niños y Los Borrachos siempre dicen la verdad

So.. uh..  does anyone who has a real T. princeps or a fakey know what the cultivation differences are?   E.g., sun tolerance, cold tolerance, heat tolerance, water needs/tolerance?  Ultimate height?

Jason,

the cultivation differences are mainly in their cold tolerance. T. princeps tolerates probably about 2 or 3 degrees C. less than T. fortunei (or the green variation). The other cultivation requests in my experience are about the same.

Regards, Rachel

Thanks.  I should sail through our winters.

Jason

(Alberto @ Jul. 31 2007,19:42)

QUOTE

.... .... .... ??? .... ..... ....    ? ? ? ? ? ? I think I have to read that topic at´´Hardy Palms´´ to understand what is going here.......

Yes, me too  

Could somebody give me the link, please?  

(Palmae @ Aug. 02 2007,00:32)

QUOTE

But what I do know is that it was a biologist who made those tests and not anybody who wants to make a profit about it with any kind of shop or something. And that's what makes this guy more trustworthy for me than you, Nigel.

Rachel, if you are in discussion with that group of people then thats your business.

If you want to know what those people did to me for the crime of sticking to my opinion then PM me and I will tell you exactly what happened .

I still have all the emails.

Those people are very charming and friendly to those who they recruit to their little circle.

Yes I know very well who did the DNA thesis and I have a copy of it, sent to me by the person himself,who did indeed do it for free and in good nature.

If you have read the DNA report you will see that I even helped with providing samples, so far from being against it I am a supporter .

So, before you judge me, ask me for the full story in private.

Its probably best if people make up their own minds.

Here is the conclusion of the DNA report.

``Several different samples of the entire genus Trachycarpus (T. fortunei, T. wagnerianus, T.

nanus, T. takil, T. geminisectus , T. oreophilus, T. princeps, T. ukhrulense, T. martianus

and T. latisectus) and representatives of other Thrinacinae, viz. Chamaerops humilis,

Guihaia argyrata, Rhapidophyllum hystrix and Trithrinax campestris were investigated by

ITS analysis. In a large AFLP analysis some additional species of the genus Trachycarpus

(T. oreophilus, T. princeps and T. ukhrulense) as well as further representatives of the

Thrinacinae (Coccothrinax, Cryosophila and Rhapis) were analysed. The ITS sequence

data indicate a separation of Trachycarpus into a group of species forming reniform seeds

and a group forming coffee bean shaped seeds. Further resolution within the reniform

group of Trachycarpus could not be achieved by means of ITS sequence analysis, whereas

by means of AFLP analysis it was possible to resolve the individiual species. Samples of T.

takil collected in the wild differentiated from putative T. takil and T. fortunei. Moreover,

variants of T. martianus (’Khaisa Hills’ and ’Nepal’) and individual plants of

T. wagnerianus which are subsumed under T. fortunei, could be resolved.

However, the analyses did not yield a consistent, reproducible result as to the relationships

both within the genus Trachycarpus and among the other Thrinacinae.``

On T princeps green form it said this which is not entirely unexpected as we all knew it wasnt a princeps as we know it,  and clearly much closer in appearance to fortunei.

``Either the marker (PK did not dissolve the individuals of the T. princeps correctly or the samples defined under the name T. princeps belonged to other kinds, for example T. fortunei.``

For the most part, it indicates that analysis has been done and the division lines drawn. However, with

"However, the analyses did not yield a consistent, reproducible result as to the relationships

both within the genus Trachycarpus and among the other Thrinacinae."

It almost seems as though the conclusion (which ever way it goes) is being backed away from.

Most of the questions that I have read are with regard to takil, although there is widespread acceptance that this palm is consistently more cold-hardy than fortunei, regardless of the classification.

(alex_7b @ Aug. 02 2007,12:10)

QUOTE

For the most part, it indicates that analysis has been done and the division lines drawn. However, with

"However, the analyses did not yield a consistent, reproducible result as to the relationships

both within the genus Trachycarpus and among the other Thrinacinae."

It almost seems as though the conclusion (which ever way it goes) is being backed away from.

Most of the questions that I have read are with regard to takil, although there is widespread acceptance that this palm is consistently more cold-hardy than fortunei, regardless of the classification.

Alex, the author of the DNA report himself said this to me

The AFLP analysis can distinguish between two individuals of the same species.  So it is not very easy to fix a limit between real species.

You dont have to translate the thesis, I want to publish a short article in PALMS.

The other problem he had is that his results are only as good as the material provided. For example, unless you physically take a sample yourself you can never be 100% sure of whether it is what it is supposed to be. For this reason it would be neccessary to take a higher number of samples from certified sources. I sent 3 samples, but they could have been anything, if I had mixed up seedlings or the supplier had made a mistake in what he supplied my samples would give wrong results. The same applied to all donors.

As to Trachycarpus sp nova , or as it was previously known green princeps , this seed was only ever sold by RPS.

On the DNA report Chris tested seed of the Trachycarpus cf. princeps (as it was called) from 3 different sources.

One was indeed what we now call sp .nova but I am pretty sure one was also from a Trachycarpus fortunei growing in a village nearby ( which Chris couldnt possibly have known) sold as princeps by a chinese seed dealer. I seem to remember mentioning this fact somewhere before.