Nano Nursery · Rare Carnivorous Plant Encyclopedia
Large traps, long leaves and rapid clumping describe different kinds of growth. A Venus flytrap can excel at one without excelling at the others. Eight documented cultivars show how those distinctions change a collection’s appearance and how to compare plants without turning a published measurement into a universal size promise.
Decide what you are measuring
Trap length describes the catching structure. Total leaf length also includes the supporting base and stalk, while rosette diameter describes the plant’s spread. A pot full of small divisions measures another characteristic again: multiplication. Before comparing two specimens, record the part measured, whether the plant is a single crown or a clump, and its stage in the growing season.
The dimensions below come from the cited descriptions. They are observations of the authors’ material, not minimum standards for a sale plant or proof that a cultivar will always outgrow another one. A newly divided plant and a mature established crown are particularly poor competitors in a size comparison.
B52: a large-trap selection
The ICPS registry reproduces Barry Rice’s 2006 diagnosis of Henning von Schmeling’s selection. It emphasises vigorous growth and brightly coloured traps reaching 5.7 cm under the reported conditions. [1] That record identifies selected material, not every exceptionally large flytrap. The short leaf bases noted in the ICPS growing guide help distinguish trap size from an expansive leaf silhouette. [7]
A2: a related selection with low growth
The registry’s 2013 account identifies ‘A2’ as a sibling of ‘B52’, raised from selfed material labelled Carolina Giant. It describes predominantly low leaves, traps up to 5.5 cm and strong red trap interiors late in the season under bright light. [1] The relationship does not make the two cultivar names interchangeable.
DC XL: size with a seasonal change in posture
The reproduced 2013 diagnosis describes substantial upright spring leaves, mature traps exceeding 5 cm, and later growth becoming smaller and low to the ground. The foliage is yellow-green with red inner trap surfaces. [1] A low autumn rosette therefore need not contradict the identity recorded for a plant that was upright in spring.
Ginormous: an introduced bog plant with a documented history
Damon Collingsworth’s 2013 description traces ‘Ginormous’ to divisions of a large flytrap removed from an introduced population at Albion, California. Its earlier ancestry was uncertain. He reported large red traps, relatively long leaf bases and vigorous outdoor growth, with a photographed trap around 4.5 cm. [2]
Albion is part of its cultivation history, not evidence of a native Californian range. The author’s favourable comparison with ‘B52’ was an observation of his plants, not a replicated ranking of all flytrap cultivars.
Gremlin: a large clump is not one giant plant
In the same publication, Collingsworth describes a selection found in wholesale stock in 2009 that multiplied rapidly into crowded bowls. Mature foliage was golden green; a temporary pale-pink blush could appear in new traps. He therefore questioned whether it was truly anthocyanin-free. [2]
Its defining comparison concerns clumping and colour together. A full pot demonstrates multiplication; it should not be presented as the diameter of one enormous rosette.
Sonic: changing teeth on long summer leaves
Yuri Sarzi initially selected the plant in 2011 for dark-red traps resembling ‘Cupped Trap’. As it matured, that appearance changed. The 2014 diagnosis records varying tooth forms, from alternating long and short structures to short triangular ones, and summer leaves reaching 20 cm. Vegetative multiplication by rhizome or leaf cuttings preserves the selection. [3]
The author also reported fast closure and associated it with trap convexity. No measured closure times or controlled comparison accompany that account, so the name should not become a claim that this is the fastest cultivar. The mature sequence of growth is more useful for identification than the appearance that first attracted the grower.
Kayan: an elongated connection beneath the trap
Guillaume Bily’s 2014 description highlights an unusually long, narrow connection between the broad leaf base and trap, reaching 2.5 cm in his material. It contrasts the consistently elongated form with ‘Crested Petioles’ and distinguishes it from the cupped traps of ‘Trichterfalle’. [4]
This makes ‘Kayan’ a useful example of why total leaf length and trap length must be recorded separately. A photograph cropped to the trap can remove the principal diagnostic feature. The original account offers no cultivar-specific thermal or watering limits, and its distinctive proportions are not sufficient grounds for inventing them.
Korean Melody Shark: narrow stalks and irregular teeth
Gi-Won Jang and Wookhyon Yoon described a selection from a cross between plants informally called Shark Tooth. Among one hundred seedlings, one was separated for its distinctive form. The diagnosis combines narrow stalks, initially slender developing traps, irregular broad short teeth and red inner lobes. The authors reported immature reproductive organs and failure to obtain seed, using rhizome division for multiplication. [5] [6]
That is a reported fertility limitation in their material, rather than a genetic explanation established by the paper. The Shark Tooth labels describe the parents’ horticultural history; they are not alternate names automatically applicable to this selected offspring. When comparing photographs, distinguish an expanding trap from a fully developed one.
Cultivation before competition
The ICPS guide emphasises strong light, low-mineral water and a moist root environment, with pot depth and water level managed to avoid a persistently soggy crown. It describes both outdoor seasonal culture and sustained indoor cultivation under adequate lighting. Those systems should be assessed on their own terms rather than mixed into one universal calendar. [7]
For Australian collections, record the plant’s actual seasonal stage. Northern Hemisphere spring observations do not establish an Australian month of maximum trap size, especially for plants maintained under controlled lighting. Compare established plants grown together over successive leaves before attributing every difference to the cultivar name.
Keep divisions linked to their source accession. A seedling with a named parent has a pedigree; that alone does not make it the parent cultivar. Where the original description explicitly requires vegetative propagation, retain that requirement with the label and propagation record.
Questions a useful growth record can answer
Is the plant becoming taller, producing larger traps or making more crowns? These are separate observations. Include a scale in whole-plant and side-view photographs, and note when the specimen was divided or repotted. Record typical mature traps as well as the largest one. This makes the collection record useful even when the plant never repeats a published maximum.
Can size authenticate an unknown plant? No: an overlapping measurement cannot reconstruct its provenance. Use the complete diagnosis and source history. Can a historical nursery claim establish current availability or rarity? Again, no: the publications document the material and observations at the time of description. Their cultivation histories do not constitute current stock information or conservation assessments.
Sources
- ICPS Names Resource: B52 (Rice 2006), A2 and DC XL (Bailey and McPherson 2013)
- Damon Collingsworth (2013), Gremlin and Ginormous, CPN 42:24–27
- Yuri Sarzi (2014), Sonic, CPN 43:75
- Guillaume Bily (2014), Kayan, CPN 43:26
- Gi-Won Jang and Wookhyon Yoon (2010), Korean Melody Shark, CPN 39:44–45
- CPN (2010), correction to Dr Gi-Won Jang’s name, CPN 39:118
- John Brittnacher, ICPS growing guide for Dionaea
Sources checked 2 October 2026.
