If you are a noob, and you know it, raise your hand!
- Thread starter cycadjungle
- Start date
seeds received! Thanks to both cycadjungle and muskymojo!
To Cycadjungle and Muskymojo,
Got the seeds today, thank you very much for sharing.
Sy
Got the seeds today, thank you very much for sharing.
Sy
Got my seeds in the mail today, thanks Cycad and Musky 
Aji Hombre got his and he's further away than I am. Oh well, hopefully I'll get mine tomorrow or thursday.
Got my care package. Much appreciated guys!
Cycdjungle: What are you thoughts about the research finding by Berkeley showing that they where only found to be around 12 million years old and The new study uses molecular evidence to show that the surviving cycad species are actually not relics of the dinosaur era, but the result of an evolutionary explosion among cycads that began about 12 million years ago.
http://newscenter.berkeley.edu/2011/10/21/cycads-are-not-%E2%80%9Cliving-fossils%E2%80%9D-from-dinosaur-age/
I'm not sure if this is the right place to be talking about cycads but LGHT, you look like you are a moderator or something, so for this time I guess its alright.
I am not an expert in cycad fossils, but I have certainly been hearing alot about the subject you brought up. Most cycad cultivators don't know enough about this subject to be able to say that these people are wrong or right, but I do know that many of the experts in cycad fossils are a bit outraged about that papper that came out. There is already a group of people that are working on writing a paper that will go against what this paper talked about, and just like with cycad taxonomy, I will sit back and let the experts fight it out and then they can tell all of us what we are supposed to think.
I CAN tell you though that the first cycads were cycadioides and the reproductive structures WERE a lot different than they are today. Some of these people are saying that the structures were like flowers, but the structures were more like the female reproductive structure of, lets say, Cycas rumphii, just shaped in a flower like shape, which is not the same. There were even male and female parts on the same plant at one time, which they are not now. Cycads have certainly changed over the millions of years and apparently, the tighter coned plants are more recent and the looser coned plants are more ancient. Rumphii type cycas species have the loose female clusters of sporaphylls, much like the cyacadioides where even Cycas revoluta types have a much tigher cluster. All the other current cycad genera have tight looking cones for both the males and the females. Female cones on a Dioon have a structure that is in-between the cycas and the other cycads.
So, my opionion is that the people writing that paper may be right, because the structures today are a lot more advanced than the plants 200 million years ago, but many people think it has been a long transition and all these plants are still related, and it should be just viewed as a progression.
I am not an expert in cycad fossils, but I have certainly been hearing alot about the subject you brought up. Most cycad cultivators don't know enough about this subject to be able to say that these people are wrong or right, but I do know that many of the experts in cycad fossils are a bit outraged about that papper that came out. There is already a group of people that are working on writing a paper that will go against what this paper talked about, and just like with cycad taxonomy, I will sit back and let the experts fight it out and then they can tell all of us what we are supposed to think.
I CAN tell you though that the first cycads were cycadioides and the reproductive structures WERE a lot different than they are today. Some of these people are saying that the structures were like flowers, but the structures were more like the female reproductive structure of, lets say, Cycas rumphii, just shaped in a flower like shape, which is not the same. There were even male and female parts on the same plant at one time, which they are not now. Cycads have certainly changed over the millions of years and apparently, the tighter coned plants are more recent and the looser coned plants are more ancient. Rumphii type cycas species have the loose female clusters of sporaphylls, much like the cyacadioides where even Cycas revoluta types have a much tigher cluster. All the other current cycad genera have tight looking cones for both the males and the females. Female cones on a Dioon have a structure that is in-between the cycas and the other cycads.
So, my opionion is that the people writing that paper may be right, because the structures today are a lot more advanced than the plants 200 million years ago, but many people think it has been a long transition and all these plants are still related, and it should be just viewed as a progression.
Thanks for the link, LGHT! I got an update on an old acquaintance (Charles Marshall--we started grad school at the U of Chicago the same year)!
Great info. I love reading and learning about ancient stuff in plants and I hate how experts no matter the side always seem to support THEIR theory. It would make sense that if the structure is advanced that it's not exactly 200 mil years old, but it could have derived from a plant that old which would make it just as important to me.
Will be looking forward to the follow up paper for sure!
Will be looking forward to the follow up paper for sure!
I think you just hit the nail on the head. I would agree that the majority, if not all of the species of cycads alive today, were not around 200 + million years ago. Things change over time. I think they call that evolution. Ferns predate cycads, but how many of the fern species today were around 300 million years ago, or whenever they started to be around? This doesn't mean that ferns didn't exist that many years ago, they have just changed over the years.
Its like a plant that was brought to people's attention in South Africa about 10 or so years ago. There was a colony of Encephalartos arenarius that only came from this huge farm and they are VERY blue, or silvery looking. They have been called "the true blue arenarius" and have gone for a lot of money, like a plant with an 8 inch round stem going for about $4500. Some offsets were taken from the plants and sent to the US and the people who have bought them have been growing them up to a now, coning sized plant. Some of the cones are coming out a different color than they are supposed to and look much like E. horridus cones. Since horridus is a very silvery looking plant, it would be logical that this colony of arenarius, at one time, naturally cross pollinated with horridus. The thing is that there are no horridus plants close enough for them to cross pollinate. It is speculated that at one time, these two species over lapped, but that could have been 1000s if not millions of years ago. So, we are seeing evolution all the time, and goes beyond us lowly, mear people, who feel we have to put everything into a species name.
Maybe, in some ways, both sides are right on this subject. Maybe none of the current species of cycads were around 100 million years ago, but it doesn't mean that cycads weren't around at that period of time. I know the people who are wanting to write this new paper are looking at their fossils and looking at the coning structures, and they think, somewhere there, they will find the true answers.
If you like old plants in general, cycads are facinating. It is said that the oldest living cycad species is the Lepidozamia hopei in Queensland Australia and a single stem will live to be 2500 years old. Since most cycads can produce offsets, and thus can become a cluster, over the years, it is not unlikely that there could be a cluster that was started from a seed 200,000 years ago, but no current stem would be the original stem. I am blessed to have been given a cluster of Dioon edule, which can live 1500 years for a single stem, and the largest stem is large enough to be 400 years old.
There is a palm called Serenoa repens, (which we call "palmettos" here in Florida) and outside Daytona, there is a plant that is estimated to be 150,000 years old. These plants put out underground stems that look like stolons, and will make a cluster over time. Well, there is a big circle of plants, and the circle is about 150 + feet around and DNA material was collected from those plants, and it was found that all the plants are the exact same plant. Over the centuries, the original plant produced new branches and then the older plants died, so the middle is bare and the circle of plants are the same plant and it continues to expand. I think that is just too cool!
Its like a plant that was brought to people's attention in South Africa about 10 or so years ago. There was a colony of Encephalartos arenarius that only came from this huge farm and they are VERY blue, or silvery looking. They have been called "the true blue arenarius" and have gone for a lot of money, like a plant with an 8 inch round stem going for about $4500. Some offsets were taken from the plants and sent to the US and the people who have bought them have been growing them up to a now, coning sized plant. Some of the cones are coming out a different color than they are supposed to and look much like E. horridus cones. Since horridus is a very silvery looking plant, it would be logical that this colony of arenarius, at one time, naturally cross pollinated with horridus. The thing is that there are no horridus plants close enough for them to cross pollinate. It is speculated that at one time, these two species over lapped, but that could have been 1000s if not millions of years ago. So, we are seeing evolution all the time, and goes beyond us lowly, mear people, who feel we have to put everything into a species name.
Maybe, in some ways, both sides are right on this subject. Maybe none of the current species of cycads were around 100 million years ago, but it doesn't mean that cycads weren't around at that period of time. I know the people who are wanting to write this new paper are looking at their fossils and looking at the coning structures, and they think, somewhere there, they will find the true answers.
If you like old plants in general, cycads are facinating. It is said that the oldest living cycad species is the Lepidozamia hopei in Queensland Australia and a single stem will live to be 2500 years old. Since most cycads can produce offsets, and thus can become a cluster, over the years, it is not unlikely that there could be a cluster that was started from a seed 200,000 years ago, but no current stem would be the original stem. I am blessed to have been given a cluster of Dioon edule, which can live 1500 years for a single stem, and the largest stem is large enough to be 400 years old.
There is a palm called Serenoa repens, (which we call "palmettos" here in Florida) and outside Daytona, there is a plant that is estimated to be 150,000 years old. These plants put out underground stems that look like stolons, and will make a cluster over time. Well, there is a big circle of plants, and the circle is about 150 + feet around and DNA material was collected from those plants, and it was found that all the plants are the exact same plant. Over the centuries, the original plant produced new branches and then the older plants died, so the middle is bare and the circle of plants are the same plant and it continues to expand. I think that is just too cool!
I'm not a noob but I haven't been on thp for a long while so my hand is up
I see many familiar faces and also see that many of the old brigade have moved on
I see many familiar faces and also see that many of the old brigade have moved on
Wow 150,000 years old for a "Plant" is imaginable. I camp at the Sequoia's on occasion and they have a tree called "The General" which is said to be the largest tree in the world because of it's circumference and it's said to only be 2,300 years old. To image a plant being able to survive even a 1,000 years is just crazy when you think about it how vulnerable they are and small in comparison to trees. Either way anything living now that can be traced back to a species that is a million years old is impressive and goes to show humans have only been on earth for about a milisecond of time.
Here is a link to the Marshall et al. paper: http://www.rbgsyd.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/116950/Cycads_paper.pdf
Basically, it's not that cycads aren't ancient--the fossils date back into the Permian and nobody is questioning that. And as cycadjungle points out the earliest cycads looked very different from modern ones (as anyone but a creationist would expect). The surprising bit is that the molecular evidence is showing that the shape of the phylogenetic "evolutionary family" tree for cycads is very unusual. Most phylogenies have early branches from near the base, middle branches coming off from the main stem higher (and later) than the early branches, and often a few clusters of closely related lineages near the crown (a lot like the shape of my baccatums!). All of the species they sampled (199 out of 300) seemed to be equally related to each other, having originated from a single cycad species in the late Miocene---so they're all pretty closely related to each other, and this is surprising because we totally expected at least some of them to be more "basal," i.e. branching away from the others much earlier in cycad history. It still could be that some of the untested 101 species might turn out to be basal.
These findings are newsworthy mostly because of the cycads' unusual and unexpected pattern of evolutionary diversification. If the plant-paleo people are in a tizzy, this won't be the first time that molecular evolutionary biologists face off against paleontologists.
Basically, it's not that cycads aren't ancient--the fossils date back into the Permian and nobody is questioning that. And as cycadjungle points out the earliest cycads looked very different from modern ones (as anyone but a creationist would expect). The surprising bit is that the molecular evidence is showing that the shape of the phylogenetic "evolutionary family" tree for cycads is very unusual. Most phylogenies have early branches from near the base, middle branches coming off from the main stem higher (and later) than the early branches, and often a few clusters of closely related lineages near the crown (a lot like the shape of my baccatums!). All of the species they sampled (199 out of 300) seemed to be equally related to each other, having originated from a single cycad species in the late Miocene---so they're all pretty closely related to each other, and this is surprising because we totally expected at least some of them to be more "basal," i.e. branching away from the others much earlier in cycad history. It still could be that some of the untested 101 species might turn out to be basal.
These findings are newsworthy mostly because of the cycads' unusual and unexpected pattern of evolutionary diversification. If the plant-paleo people are in a tizzy, this won't be the first time that molecular evolutionary biologists face off against paleontologists.
" Hand up high enough to hurt my shoulder"
This is my first year growing anything. I started with a small garden of tomatoes and sweet bells. Then, a friend gave me some seeds his wife brought with her from Vietnam. Neither of us have any idea what kind they actually are. We just know hot and red. As soon as I saw those first little green leaves pop out of the dirt, I was hooked. Now, my wife says I'm obsessed. I've gone to a lot of places online looking for help with the various plants I've got out there now. No community or forum, including the local CO-OP, have been as friendly, inviting and helpful as the people here at TheHotPepper.com. Thank you all for the help and the info.
Cycad, Thanks for reminding us noobs to appreciate our good fortune.
This is my first year growing anything. I started with a small garden of tomatoes and sweet bells. Then, a friend gave me some seeds his wife brought with her from Vietnam. Neither of us have any idea what kind they actually are. We just know hot and red. As soon as I saw those first little green leaves pop out of the dirt, I was hooked. Now, my wife says I'm obsessed. I've gone to a lot of places online looking for help with the various plants I've got out there now. No community or forum, including the local CO-OP, have been as friendly, inviting and helpful as the people here at TheHotPepper.com. Thank you all for the help and the info.
Cycad, Thanks for reminding us noobs to appreciate our good fortune.
