# Crypt ID



## trenac (Jul 16, 2004)

Need help, got at Petsmart in asst Crypts, can anyone ID it?


----------



## Momotaro (Feb 17, 2004)

C. balansae or C. retrospiralis would be my guess. Most likely a C. balansae runner.

Mike


----------



## Cavan Allen (Jul 22, 2004)

_Cryptocoryne crispatula var. balanse_. "C. balanse" is not a species of its own.

I'm hardly a photography expert, but if you have photo editing software, you can reduce the red. I have did that with the Nikon editing software when I took photos of _Ludwigia palustris_ flowers.


----------



## trenac (Jul 16, 2004)

Sorry for the bad quality of the photo, however I don't have photo editing hardware.


----------



## Cavan Allen (Jul 22, 2004)

Oh, no problem or anything. I just had the same problem with some photos I took. I think it was because they were illuminated with incandescent light and/or because I failed to adjust the camera settings accordingly.


----------



## Momotaro (Feb 17, 2004)

Don't you think C. balansae says it all? Why make things more difficult than need be when someone asks for a simple plant ID?

Mike


----------



## Cavan Allen (Jul 22, 2004)

I know most people know what it is, but why call it by an incorrect name? If somebody asks for an ID, shouldn't they be given the _right_ name? I don't see why that's making things more difficult. I myself like to know that sort of thing. So do a lot of other people. I certainly didn't mean any to offend anyone.


----------



## Momotaro (Feb 17, 2004)

Understand you totally. However, I kind of believe in keeping the hobby simple and limiting the Latin and "tech-speak" whenever I can. Being too esoteric can embarrasing to the person who is not in the know.

I always felt that IDing with simpler names helps people who are newer to the hobby identify those plants better in less specialized situations. 

For all intent and purpose didn't I identify the plant correctly, at least as we can tell by the photo? :wink: Isn't that what Trenac wanted? If he were to shoot down to the LFS and buy a C. balansae, wouldn't he get the same plant? :wink: 

Mike


----------



## HeyPK (Jan 23, 2004)

For detailed reasons unknown to me, the powers that be (Jacobsen, primarily) have declared that C. blansae is a C. crispatula variety, along with four other similar narrow-leaved crypts, tonkeniensis, sinensis, flaccidifolia, and crispatula. Probably, there are many intermediate forms, all having similar flower structure and color, etc. C. wendtii has a lot of varieties, too, and, as collecting continues, it is likely that other species will also turn out to have many varieties. Crypts have so many varieties because they live in numerous localized populations, along streams, all usually isolated from nearby populations. There is little or no gene flow between populations, and each population evolves in its own particular direction. 

This variation is not limited to crypts. Right now the lumpers are ascendant over the splitters, and there is a great variety of leaf widths and lengths in the species Vallisneria americana. Most Vallisneria americana varieties produce a single female flower, but there is a variety I saw in the Ichetucknee River that has multiple flowers branching from the end of a thick stalk.


----------



## Cavan Allen (Jul 22, 2004)

Momotaro said:


> Understand you totally. However, I kind of believe in keeping the hobby simple and limiting the Latin and "tech-speak" whenever I can. Being too esoteric can embarrasing to the person who is not in the know.


I disagree. I think that if people are too concerned with making things "easy" and go out of their way to not offend people, it can impair the learning process. In other words, there's no need to 'dumb it down' (although not many 'newbies' really need to dive into discussions about excess K interfering with calcium uptake and so on). We have a great community of people here and because of that, advancing in the hobby is a LOT easier than it used to be. I wish this kind of thing had been around when I was 14.

We have some very, very good fish breeders in my club, and when I've asked questions about the subject and have been wrong, they corrected me. I'm very thick skinned, so I didn't mind their corrections. And I'm glad they did. I've learned quite a bit.

There's nothing to be intimidated about either. Maybe beard algae, but even that can be overcome. :wink:



> I always felt that IDing with simpler names helps people who are newer to the hobby identify those plants better in less specialized situations.


I may be a stickler, but I feel strongly that we should try our best. I remember searching for _Ammania gracilis_ and asking around for it for over a year before seeing it in a local store labled as "Borneo red hedge". That traumatic experience (and the myriad of mislabled plants there and elsewhere) forever shaped my views on the subject. It's a slippery slope kind of thing. If we don't try our best, we might end up like that store!



> For all intent and purpose didn't I identify the plant correctly, at least as we can tell by the photo? :wink: Isn't that what Trenac wanted?
> If he were to shoot down to the LFS and buy a C. balansae, wouldn't he get the same plant?


I guess that depends on the LFS. :wink:


----------



## Momotaro (Feb 17, 2004)

> Quote:
> For all intent and purpose didn't I identify the plant correctly, at least as we can tell by the photo? Isn't that what Trenac wanted?
> If he were to shoot down to the LFS and buy a C. balansae, wouldn't he get the same plant?
> 
> I guess that depends on the LFS.


I really think you are over exaggerating that to try and prove a point. You can walk into almost any LFS and buy Crypt balansae if you asked for Cryptocoryne crispulata var. "balansae", you'd never get the plant.

As an "enlightener" you should make things easier. If anything, making things easier is what is going to actually advance the hobby quicker to advance. You turn off less people in the beginning and make them feel more like a participant than an observer. You may be at a level where you consider referring to plants in anything but Latin is dumbing it down, but I guarantee you the majority of members and lurkers on most boards are not on that same level. Being esoteric is not going to advance the hobby as quickly, if at all.

I never thought I would say it, but right now, the hobby is more about including new people than maintaining our "plant cliques".

Just to be consistent, if you feel that strongly about my "mistake" in my ID of the Crypt, might I also suggest you drop a line over to the ADA and let Mr. Amano know he has also been identifying the plant incorrectly in his books for years now. :wink: LOL!

Mike


----------



## SCMurphy (Jan 28, 2004)

Just say "balansae" as that is it's common name and save the stickler stuff for when we are talking about the different var. of crispulata and there is an actual need to be proper. It could all change at any time given how cladistics are done.


----------



## Cavan Allen (Jul 22, 2004)

> I really think you are over exaggerating that to try and prove a point. You can walk into almost any LFS and buy Crypt balansae if you asked for Cryptocoryne crispulata var. "balansae", you'd never get the plant.


I was KIDDING. The part about the "Borneo red hedge" is however, true.

We'll just have to disagree about the dumbing it down thing. I don't think referring to plants by their Latin names is being esoteric at all. If somebody wants to learn them, they will. I'll go as far as to say that if someone has enough interest to even find a place like this, we are only failing them by holding their hands through it. And Latin names are but a small part of the whole picture anyway.

I run the AHAP program for my club here in Pittsburgh and have for the past few years. That includes presentations, articles, awarding points for plants propagated, and so on. I haven't dumbed down any of it for anyone. I think I've succeeded in increasing interest in planted aquariums. We're probably to the point now where we could make our own specialized club. AHAP even brought in more money than BAP for the first time in club history this past month. Things are looking good.



> I never thought I would say it, but right now, the hobby is more about including new people than maintaining our "plant cliques".


I totally agree. We only disagree on how to do that. Different approaches may appeal to different people though, so perhaps we'll get everyone between the two of us. :wink:



> Just to be consistent, if you feel that strongly about my "mistake"


I don't, really. Again, I certainly didn't intend to offend anyone! I only meant to clarify, not correct. There is a difference. I guess I shouldn't have said anything...



> in my ID of the Crypt, might I also suggest you drop a line over to the ADA and let Mr. Amano know he has also been identifying the plant incorrectly in his books for years now. :wink: LOL!


That he has. I think I can find it in my heart to forgive him though. :lol:


----------



## Cavan Allen (Jul 22, 2004)

SCMurphy said:


> Just say "balansae" as that is it's common name and save the stickler stuff for when we are talking about the different var. of crispulata and there is an actual need to be proper. It could all change at any time given how cladistics are done.


Ok, but really just say balanse. Using incorrect Latin names as common names can't be a good thing. Slippery slope there.


----------



## Momotaro (Feb 17, 2004)

You will let it slip for Amano, but for me...! LOL! :wink: 

Mike


----------



## Slaigar (Aug 25, 2004)

It is safe to say that most of us here know what "C. balansae" is. There are not too many common names but rather outdated latin names. I must add that maybe when identifying species, it would be best to give _both_ common name(if available) and latin names. Some of us here are collectors and differentiating between two variations of _C. becketti _or _C. crispatula_ is quite important. But to the regular aquarist, the plant itself is more important than the name given. Just give them both options.

When at a petstore or just talking to friends, I would rather say _C. petchi_ rather than _C. becketti "petchi"_. Here though, we do have time to type out the whole name.

Might need a new topic for this discussion!


----------



## HeyPK (Jan 23, 2004)

I find it useful to refer to the older names along with the newer names, for example, C. x willisii, the old C. nevillii. or , C. walkeri, the old C. lutea. C. undulata has a checkered history. It used to be C. willisii, and then ,for a while, was C. axelrodii. Rataj said that it had "suffered nomenclatural bad luck".

At the pet store, if I am lucky enough to see a crypt I want, I just say, "Gimme that one!"


----------



## Slaigar (Aug 25, 2004)

A few months back, I would not be able to tell you what _C. lutea_ (still looking for this plant) and _C. lucens_ was. Thankfully Jan's Crypt page is quite informative.

I share the same sentiments when pointing out plants at a petstore. Usually I end up grabbing them myself, hehe. They regularly have _C. wendtii / C. becketii_ lookalikes, but they have no clue what specific species they are.

Atleast collection codes are not (widely) used on _Cryptocorynes_! RVA is probably one of the only importers/exporters that use this. I do think that it is good practice to list locations.


----------



## aquaverde (Feb 9, 2004)

Cavan Allen said:


> Ok, but really just say balanse. Using incorrect Latin names as common names can't be a good thing. Slippery slope there.


ROFL!!!

I think everyone has managed to give a pretty complete, if wordy, answer. Only, isn't it really retrospiralis...?
:mrgreen: 
Just kidding!


----------

