Talk:Venus Flytrap
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Carnivorous plants, an attempt to better organise information in articles related to carnivorous plants. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| B | This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale. | ||
| Top | This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received an importance rating for WikiProject Plants assessment. | ||
Q: In the article it says that the seeds "require stratification to germinate". I'm not an experienced grower myself but I have have spoken to some who are and they seem to agree that stratification is not neccesary. Can anyone back this claim? yes those things are very important to the cycle.
Q: The statement in this article "It's very rare that a trap will catch even three insects in its lifetime" refers to one leaf trap, or the entire plant? - AdunaicLayman
A: Statement applies to a single leaf. The plant's lifelime prey total can be quite large, depending on how many years it lives. Main article has been clarified. -Mr.Logic 15:45, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Whose genitalia?
In the opening paragraph, it says:
The plant's name refers to Venus, the Roman goddess of love, after an apparent similiarity between the plant's leaves and the male genitalia, and the plant's behavior, luring the unsuspecting to their deaths.
Should this be changed to say that the leaves are similar to female genitalia?Pkeck 16:36, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- yes, female. but more than just the physical appearance, the plant was named named at a time when women were considered "temptresses". see
http://science.howstuffworks.com/venus-flytrap1.htm for one such mention, search the web for more.
[edit] Snaring secrets of Venus flytrap revealed
Interesting information which could be incorporated. —Christiaan 21:54, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
== Huh? ==i dont get it what does it eat? The first paragraph says, A common US name for the plant is tipitiwitchet. I have never heard this name used before. Is this a regional thing? If so, what region? Or am I just lacking in knowledge on this issue? --Adun 04:18, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
I've never heard it. It sounds British to me, although I am not sure. I live in the Midwest, where many strange names come from (like bubbler), and I've never heard it said. So I'm removing it. --WikiFan04Talk 20:28, 21 Aug 2005 (CDT)
well its native to North and South Carolina so odds are its a Carolina thing. I can't imagine such a particular common name arising anywhere else (i.e. where its not native) Jasongetsdown 21:59, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
"Tipitiwitchet" explanation here: [1]
[edit] w/c
in the Philippines' famous comic Darna w/c is used by the villain Flaviana turning Venus flytraps into a big monster as her defense.
What does w/c mean? Bill52270 01:46, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
- I have no idea either. Someone needs to answer this! Vimescarrot 16:47, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
"Tipitiwitchet" explaination here: [2]
[edit] What happened?
Someone has edited Venus flytrap, by changing, erasing, and writing about the Man's Happy Place! -- Hurricane Devon (Talk) 18:32, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
Just another unimpressive vandalism attempt. Properly & quickly reverted. Mr.Logic 18:35, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Family Dionaeceae
I read that scientists put the Venus flytrap in a new family named Dionaeceae. -- Hurricane Devon (Talk) 13:46, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
- It's Dionaeaceae. This family is not recommended by the Angiosperm Phylogeny Group. Dionaea, Aldrovanda, Drosera and Drosophyllum have all been placed in monogeneric families at one point or another, but only the Drosophyllaceae is currently recommended, as it seems more closely related to the Dioncophyllaceae than to the rest of the Droseraceae. The Droseraceae (minus Drosophyllum) appears to be monophyletic, and hardly merits splitting into three families, given that two would contain just one species. polypompholyx 16:57, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] The goddess Venus & her job description
User:Methegreat did an edit claiming "Venus (Aphrodite) has nothing to do with plant life." I beg to differ, as does Britannica. http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9075054?tocId=9075054 Venus was originally associated with fields & gardens, only later taking on the additional job description of love. If she isn't associated with plants, the name "Venus' Flytrap" makes no sense at all. -Mr.Logic 20:18, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
I always heard the name had nothing to do with the goddess Venus. Instead, it was called a "Venus fly-trap" because it looked so bizarre it must have come from the planet Venus. I can't remember, though, where I read this.Rt66lt 23:20, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Rewrite
I have just rewritten the article so it flows better and doesn't constantly repeat and contradict itself. I have removed any unsubstantiated claims and added a few journal references. If anyone wants to add anything new, it'd be a lot more useful to expand the habitat section than to add yet another popular culture reference! The old article had more information about manga comics than about botany... polypompholyx 12:00, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
- Bravo! You very bold to attempt a total re-write, and I was sceptical when it popped up in my watch list. I was greatly pleased & surprised at the quality of the result. (Featured article, anyone?) I noticed how you preserved the consisus wording from the various quibbles in recent history.
- I do have one complaint - in the revision, you introduced a statment about how the plant evolved. I don't think we want to introduce an ID vs Evolution war here, especially when that statment could easily be made more NPOV.
- Good work!
- -Mr.Logic 14:06, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
-
- It's not really a total rewrite: a lot of it was just rejigging what was already there and making it more coherent. I recently had a whinge on the talk page for Carnivorous plant - an article that I wrote almost entirely from scratch, but which has since only accumulated ill-written cruft and a few extra commas. I thought that if I'm prepared to whinge, I ought at least be prepared to fix other pages I find important! I don't think it's anywhere near good enough for a featured article: it needs a lot more work, particularly on habitat/distribution and ecology (see the WikiProject TreeOfLife 'template' at Ragwort).
- I don't think the statement about the evolution of the plant is contentious. There's a vast tract on evolution in the carnivorous plant article that has never attracted the attentions of the ID crowd. The day that the word 'evolved' becomes construed as POV by the Wikipedia community, is the day I leave.
- polypompholyx 15:24, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Pop culture
This is a plea for authors to think twice about adding anything else to the pop-culture section. It's already over-long and rambling: does anyone really want to know that something vaguely resembling a VFT had a bit-part in an episode of an obscure cartoon in 1989? There are much more important and encyclopaedic things that could be added, such as more detail of the plant's ecology and conservation status, etc. I am mightily tempted to leave the reference to Audrey in, and shunt the rest of it off to List of cameo appearances by Venus flytraps in cartoons or similar… polypompholyx 10:48, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
- While I agree that items in this section should make extensive use of venus flytraps (i.e. main characters such as in LSoH, primary supporting characters, main obstacles or guest characters for a given episode, and so on, rather than just one-time appearances as minor obstacles in single episodes, etc), I also think that specifically including LSoH and ignoring other media would be an expression of POV, i.e. stating between the lines that LSoH, either by virtue of being a major Hollywood motion picture or an American production or whatnot, was somehow more important than other appearances and thus worthy of mention when others were not.
- I guess what I'm saying is tread carefully, here.67.169.63.116 07:14, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Family Dionaeceae
I have some images I took of my VFT closing in on a housefly. If these are useful, I would be glad to post them here with appropriate guidance on the formating, etc. You can see the images here: http://photobucket.com/albums/f326/ebeyonder/
[edit] Some nonsense some guy told me down the pub?
I was chatting to a friend who said there is a theory that the Venus Flytrap, being monotypic and thus unrelated to any other plant originated from an extraterrestial source. That the plant was discovered in and around a large meteorite crater. Does this theory exist?→
- Although the genus Dionaea is monotypic, there are other genera in the family. In other words, there are other plants that are relatively closely related, such as the sundews [[Drosera]] and Waterwheel plants [[Aldrovanda]]. That being said, there has been some speculation that past meteors in the Carolinas were the source of the radiation that allowed the Venus Flytrap to mutate and evolve from its ancestors. I don't know if this hypothesis is anything beyond speculation, though. Either way, the plant is not thought to be extraterrestrial. Hope that helps! --NoahElhardt 22:56, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
-
- You mean it's not from Venus? ;) -Will Beback 21:00, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
I have read this exact same thing. Apparantly they grow in only one area naturally (as wiki shows). This is a 100 or so mile region surrounding a meteor crater...creepy eh?!
[edit] Double-click trigger hairs...
"The trigger hairs must be touched twice in quick succession (which prevents non-prey stimuli such as raindrops from triggering the trap)..."
Hmm, might all venus flytraps potentially have to pay royalties to Microsoft for using the Double-click technology? *snicker*
- Heh, if the plants had any money, Microsoft might have a patent infringment lawsuit coming their way. I think the plants developed the technology first! --NoahElhardt 14:18, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Fire
Please add a mention of the fact that Dionaea muscipula is fire-tolerant and fire-dependent. It depends on fire to control larger plants that would otherwise outcompete it. Carlaclaws 22:29, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
Very obvious question: Do you have any sources for this claim?
Sorry, thought I posted these:
"The growth form of Dionaea as a rosette with leaves close to the ground makes this plant less competitive against grasses and shrubs. Following fire, Dionaea may be highly abundant for 3–5 years until shrubs and monocotyledonous plants overtop the small rosette plants. Thus this species is restricted to early successional stages after fire (Roberts and Oosting, 1958)"-Quantification of insect nitrogen utilization by the venus fly trap Dionaea muscipula catching prey with highly variable isotope signatures, W. Schulze, E.D. Schulze, I. Schulze, and R. Oren, Journal of Experimental Botany, Vol. 52, No. 358, pp. 1041-1049, May 1, 2001 © 2001 Oxford University Press (available online at [[3]]
Also:
"The ecosystem that supports Venus flytraps experiences frequent fires that clear out competing plants and volatilize nitrogen in the soil. Hence, Venus flytraps have a corner on the nitrogen market immediately following fire, when they obtain three quarters of their nitrogen supply from insect prey. If fire does not reoccur within 10 years, however, competition with other plants restricts the Venus flytrap’s access to light and insects, and populations begin to decline."-Lissa Leege, Asst. Professor of Biology, Georgia Southern University, Scientific American, December 2002. Carlaclaws 21:13, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Live Journal
WIKIPEDIA IS NOT A WEB DIRECTORY
I deleted the link to the "Venus Fly Trap Photo Blog" It's a Live Journal that is rarely updated. The blog is more about the author's personal problems (and consequent apologizing for sporadic/shitty updates) than it is about the plants, the horticulture. Also, "photo blog" is laughable. 99% of the photos in this blog are so tiny, they are utterly useless (I'm talking 100x100 LJ icon size here!).
"Huge, colorful gallery" ????? LMAO , WHERE? There's nothing there, and even if there were, it's nothing that can't be found with a google search.
Did anyone actually READ this blog before submitting it to wikipedia? Outrageous.
I can't imagine how this crappy little LiveJournal made it into the external links for an encyclopedia article (maybe the author being a cute asian girl has something to do with it, eh?) but this is a real joke. I removed the link. I sincerely doubt anyone can provide a good argument as to why this crappy link should be included in the article. Wikipedia is not a web directory, and this Live Journal link CANNOT be taken seriously as a reference or useful external link. It's utterly useless.
