FlytrapCare Carnivorous Plant Forums

Lot’s of dogmatic behaviors and beliefs in this community. I suggest people be open to those that challenge conventional wisdom, especially when those doing the challenging present evidence.

To continue to fuel the debate, I wanted to post an update showing my SD Kronos that I have been growing indoors for 2.5 years under artificial lights (high PAR LED). A year ago I went on vacation for 2 weeks and screwed up my watering system, so the plant had considerable die back. I lost about half the total biomass, but the plant has bounced back after a year of proper care.

I had to transplant into a 12.5 inch diameter pot because of over crowding. The plant has so many mouths to feed that I could feed it every day and still have unfed, open mouths wanting to be fed.

My experiment shows that dormancy is not required. My experiment also shows that venus fly traps geow VERY well indoors. The most important thing for indoor growing is to have a PAR meter to ensure your plant is getting enough photosynthetically active radiation. Also, indoor growing, of course, requires feeding. I use blood worms. This causes the plant to grow more vigorously than it would in the wild and it creates new divisions, which take about 6 months to reach adulthood under my set up. Much faster than the conventional wisdom shared in this community.

The fact that the old divisions may die after a couple of years with no dormancy is a non-issue because the original mother plant is technically a meristem that has been proven to die after flowering. So what people think is the original mother division is technically a clone of the mother meristem after flowering, just like new divisions are clones of the mother division. In my frow set up, so many new divisions get created all the time, and there are always energetic young plants that have only been alive for a year. Some divisions flower. Some divisions are small. Some divisions are giants.

Attached are two pictures. The original plant in its 3 inch diameter cup 2.5 years ago, and the plant now in a 12.5 inch pot.

Growth is so rapid that I may need to transplant a second time this year! Oh and notice the live sphagnum? It grew on its own from the dry Besgrow spagmoss brand sphagnum.

Back to my original point: dormancy is NOT required to grow a thriving venus fly trap. But hey, maybe the dogmatic types here will be right and in 6 months I will have to downgrade from this 12.5 inch diameter pot back to the 3 inch diameter cup the plant started in. I am confident that in 6 months they will move the goal posts again.

Dogma never landed a man on the moon.

Jagasian wrote:Lot’s of dogmatic behaviors and beliefs in this community. I suggest people be open to those that challenge conventional wisdom, especially when those doing the challenging present evidence.

To continue to fuel the debate, I wanted to post an update showing my SD Kronos that I have been growing indoors for 2.5 years under artificial lights (high PAR LED). A year ago I went on vacation for 2 weeks and screwed up my watering system, so the plant had considerable die back. I lost about half the total biomass, but the plant has bounced back after a year of proper care.

I had to transplant into a 12.5 inch diameter pot because of over crowding. The plant has so many mouths to feed that I could feed it every day and still have unfed, open mouths wanting to be fed.

My experiment shows that dormancy is not required. My experiment also shows that venus fly traps geow VERY well indoors. The most important thing for indoor growing is to have a PAR meter to ensure your plant is getting enough photosynthetically active radiation. Also, indoor growing, of course, requires feeding. I use blood worms. This causes the plant to grow more vigorously than it would in the wild and it creates new divisions, which take about 6 months to reach adulthood under my set up. Much faster than the conventional wisdom shared in this community.

The fact that the old divisions may die after a couple of years with no dormancy is a non-issue because the original mother plant is technically a meristem that has been proven to die after flowering. So what people think is the original mother division is technically a clone of the mother meristem after flowering, just like new divisions are clones of the mother division. In my frow set up, so many new divisions get created all the time, and there are always energetic young plants that have only been alive for a year. Some divisions flower. Some divisions are small. Some divisions are giants.

Attached are two pictures. The original plant in its 3 inch diameter cup 2.5 years ago, and the plant now in a 12.5 inch pot.

Growth is so rapid that I may need to transplant a second time this year! Oh and notice the live sphagnum? It grew on its own from the dry Besgrow spagmoss brand sphagnum.

Back to my original point: dormancy is NOT required to grow a thriving venus fly trap. But hey, maybe the dogmatic types here will be right and in 6 months I will have to downgrade from this 12.5 inch diameter pot back to the 3 inch diameter cup the plant started in. I am confident that in 6 months they will move the goal posts again.

Dogma never landed a man on the moon.

Wow, nice flytrap! Seems like you are doing well with no dormancy, keep it up! I should start experimenting with it.

You bring up an interesting point. Because the main plant gets replaced after it flowers then no flytrap that has flowered has its original growth point still. You seem to have a great indoor setup so if possible I would like you to experiment. Take 4 divisions, similarly sized, put 2 inside 2 outside(or dormancy/no dormancy if you keep it outdoors during summer). Full sun for the ones outside. Same feeding schedule, similar water levels. Document their progress at least before and after the one with dormancy has its dormancy. If you decide to do this I am looking forward to seeing the results. Maybe you will prove that they can do just as fine without a dormancy as with one.

I will admit I did get a tad dismissive about the meristem thing. It's just all the experience I've had growing and observing these plants. And the way it was described as apparently being so obvious to the naked eye. I swear, if it was so obvious, then I would've noticed it by now.

Maybe I could try digging up one of my plants shortly after flowering next spring. That would clear things up.

sanguinearocks101 wrote: ↑Mon Aug 10, 2020 12:13 am You bring up an interesting point. Because the main plant gets replaced after it flowers then no flytrap that has flowered has its original growth point still. You seem to have a great indoor setup so if possible I would like you to experiment. Take 4 divisions, similarly sized, put 2 inside 2 outside(or dormancy/no dormancy if you keep it outdoors during summer). Full sun for the ones outside. Same feeding schedule, similar water levels. Document their progress at least before and after the one with dormancy has its dormancy. If you decide to do this I am looking forward to seeing the results. Maybe you will prove that they can do just as fine without a dormancy as with one.

Just drop it already, all of you.
You're all getting so far down the rabbit hole of measuring dicks that everyone is making themselves look like children.
He backed off his absolute claim early of no dormancy necessary by saying that the original growth point may have been replaced by a division. "MAY HAVE BEEN REPLACED BY A DIVISION" He indirectly said he cannot be 100% sure, he just just won't say it definitively because he's a guy; he can't admit that he may be wrong.
You keep saying he's wrong, citing years of experiences, including your own. Yet you now put forth the suggestion that he perform a possible experiment to satisfy you, based on scientific method that could shed light on an explanation. Essentially telling him to prove you wrong because you're a guy; you can't admit that you may be wrong.
Why don't you do the experiment you have suggested and share your findings? You could closely monitor your four plants to record growth point death and replacement, to prove your point or not.
You would have to feed your indoor plants as extensively as he claims in order to be a fair experiment.
Take pictures weekly to document your results, showing progress or decline. Then get back to us after about 2 years, with all of your findings, to show what you end up with.
If you're not willing to do the leg work, then just disagree, shake your head, drop it, and keep scrolling.
If you're not willing to experiment yourself, just drop it already.

ChefDean wrote:

sanguinearocks101 wrote: ↑Mon Aug 10, 2020 12:13 am You bring up an interesting point. Because the main plant gets replaced after it flowers then no flytrap that has flowered has its original growth point still. You seem to have a great indoor setup so if possible I would like you to experiment. Take 4 divisions, similarly sized, put 2 inside 2 outside(or dormancy/no dormancy if you keep it outdoors during summer). Full sun for the ones outside. Same feeding schedule, similar water levels. Document their progress at least before and after the one with dormancy has its dormancy. If you decide to do this I am looking forward to seeing the results. Maybe you will prove that they can do just as fine without a dormancy as with one.

Just drop it already, all of you.
You're all getting so far down the rabbit hole of measuring dicks that everyone is making themselves look like children.
He backed off his absolute claim early of no dormancy necessary by saying that the original growth point may have been replaced by a division. "MAY HAVE BEEN REPLACED BY A DIVISION" He indirectly said he cannot be 100% sure, he just just won't say it definitively because he's a guy; he can't admit that he may be wrong.
You keep saying he's wrong, citing years of experiences, including your own. Yet you now put forth the suggestion that he perform a possible experiment to satisfy you, based on scientific method that could shed light on an explanation. Essentially telling him to prove you wrong because you're a guy; you can't admit that you may be wrong.
Why don't you do the experiment you have suggested and share your findings? You could closely monitor your four plants to record growth point death and replacement, to prove your point or not.
You would have to feed your indoor plants as extensively as he claims in order to be a fair experiment.
Take pictures weekly to document your results, showing progress or decline. Then get back to us after about 2 years, with all of your findings, to show what you end up with.
If you're not willing to do the leg work, then just disagree, shake your head, drop it, and keep scrolling.
If you're not willing to experiment yourself, just drop it already.

Dammit y'all, you made Chef mad. Now he won't cook me bacon! You're all grounded. Everyone go to your rooms. Imma get the sock ruler if you roll your eyes one more time. And apologize to your dad.... I mean Chef.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

I really do feel like the necessity of dormancy should be put on the same list that no politics goes on. It's just too much of a hot button.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

ChefDean wrote: ↑Mon Aug 10, 2020 1:22 am

sanguinearocks101 wrote: ↑Mon Aug 10, 2020 12:13 am You bring up an interesting point. Because the main plant gets replaced after it flowers then no flytrap that has flowered has its original growth point still. You seem to have a great indoor setup so if possible I would like you to experiment. Take 4 divisions, similarly sized, put 2 inside 2 outside(or dormancy/no dormancy if you keep it outdoors during summer). Full sun for the ones outside. Same feeding schedule, similar water levels. Document their progress at least before and after the one with dormancy has its dormancy. If you decide to do this I am looking forward to seeing the results. Maybe you will prove that they can do just as fine without a dormancy as with one.

Just drop it already, all of you.
You're all getting so far down the rabbit hole of measuring dicks that everyone is making themselves look like children.
He backed off his absolute claim early of no dormancy necessary by saying that the original growth point may have been replaced by a division. "MAY HAVE BEEN REPLACED BY A DIVISION" He indirectly said he cannot be 100% sure, he just just won't say it definitively because he's a guy; he can't admit that he may be wrong.
You keep saying he's wrong, citing years of experiences, including your own. Yet you now put forth the suggestion that he perform a possible experiment to satisfy you, based on scientific method that could shed light on an explanation. Essentially telling him to prove you wrong because you're a guy; you can't admit that you may be wrong.
Why don't you do the experiment you have suggested and share your findings? You could closely monitor your four plants to record growth point death and replacement, to prove your point or not.
You would have to feed your indoor plants as extensively as he claims in order to be a fair experiment.
Take pictures weekly to document your results, showing progress or decline. Then get back to us after about 2 years, with all of your findings, to show what you end up with.
If you're not willing to do the leg work, then just disagree, shake your head, drop it, and keep scrolling.
Drop it already.

What the...

"hmm you should do further experimentation on this topic so you can definitively prove this claim you previously made"

"WHAT THE HELL IS THE MATTER WITH YOU CHILDREN I SERIOUSLY CAN'T BELIEVE THIS WHY DON'T YOU DO IT YOURSELF???"

It was just a suggestion...

Cross wrote: ↑Mon Aug 10, 2020 1:30 amDammit y'all, you made Chef mad. Now he won't cook me bacon! You're all grounded. Everyone go to your rooms. Imma get the sock ruler if you roll your eyes one more time. And apologize to your dad.... I mean Chef.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Miss Cross, I'll always cook you bacon. I'll even fry you up some Beignets, slather them with Maple Syrup icing, topped with crispy bacon.
Trust me, it's better than a Quebec Pizza.

Based on my own plants and very close observation (I repotted after flowering last year), after flowering the main growth point is replaced by a division. This division is not a completely new division all the time- sometimes it is almost like the rhizome branches slightly. This means that it often looks like the main growth point is still growing but it’s actually a division that is growing very closely to the mother. This has been proven to be true by the scientific article I posted earlier on this thread. You should be able to access it via SciHub.

Flytraps can look absolutely awesome under lights. I did eventually experience some slowing in winter but that was because the plants were near a window and getting seasonal cues despite my grow light. I also didn’t feed them heavily. I do think they can go dormantless though. It is important to remember that even if a dormantless flytrap has tons of divisions replacing the original growth points, the plant is still alive...

ChefDean wrote:

Cross wrote: ↑Mon Aug 10, 2020 1:30 amDammit y'all, you made Chef mad. Now he won't cook me bacon! You're all grounded. Everyone go to your rooms. Imma get the sock ruler if you roll your eyes one more time. And apologize to your dad.... I mean Chef.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Miss Cross, I'll always cook you bacon. I'll even fry you up some Beignets, slather them with Maple Syrup icing, topped with crispy bacon.
Trust me, it's better than a Quebec Pizza.

AW thanks. But now I'm really, extra hungry lol.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Moderators, can you lock this thread please?

Lock the thread? Why? Why are people so sensitive when someone questions conventional wisdom?

Jagasian wrote: ↑Mon Aug 10, 2020 4:05 amLock the thread? Why? Why are people so sensitive when someone questions conventional wisdom?

ChefDean described it perfectly in this post. We don't need a repeat of the off-topic "I'm right, and if you disagree with me, you're blind and stupid" pissing contest. There really is nothing more to be said on this topic. You've demonstrated that with the right care, Venus flytraps can be forced to grow year-round.

I like ChefDean's idea of doing a comparison study: Next time you divide that pot of SD Kronos, put 4 plants in individual pots. Grow 2 of them indoors and the other 2 outdoors (with dormancy), then see how they compare. This would be a great topic for a new thread.

Time to end this pissing contest.

For credentials, I've got a paper I'm submitting to the Australian Journal of Botany regarding petiolaris and bryastrum plants and their evolution.

I have 12 plants. Typical.

They are going indoors on my countertop and also some will go into a mesocosm type thing, basically an outdoor simulator, to remove variables.

I will report results.

This should be enough to end pissing contest.

No special help will be given, it's obvious that a vft grown indoors with fertilizer will be better than an outdoor one without nutrients.

Well see.