Nano Nursery · Rare Carnivorous Plant Encyclopedia
A Venus flytrap’s unusual shape can involve the trap lobes, their rim, the marginal teeth or an extra structure behind the trap. Those are different features, and their expression may change through the growing season. These nine published cultivar accounts explain where to look, what the original growers actually reported and why a single extraordinary leaf rarely establishes an identity.
Start with the structure that changed
The two broad lobes form the trap itself. Their outer edges carry the marginal teeth or lashes, while trigger hairs occupy the inner surfaces. Fused marginal teeth are therefore different from fused lobe tips. A second trap-like structure behind a normal trap is a third kind of change. The descriptions below use those distinctions to make their comparisons.
None of these names should be applied automatically to a damaged plant. The task is to compare repeated growth with the documented diagnosis and the plant’s provenance. Where an author observed seasonal variation, an ordinary-looking leaf is part of the evidence to interpret, rather than immediate proof that the label is wrong.
Cupped Trap: joined tips make an open trap bowl-shaped
Steven Stewart’s 2004 account traces ‘Cupped Trap’ to a selection isolated by Agri-Starts III in 1998. Fusion at the far end of the trap gives an open leaf a cup-like form. Its marginal lashes remain curled until after opening. The description also records broad, tapering leaf blades with finely serrated margins, frequent rhizome division and occasional plantlets on flower stalks. [1]
Stewart reported that the unusual traps still caught insects. This is a useful counterexample to the assumption that every altered trap is non-functional. He required vegetative propagation. The account’s photographed plant and dimensions document one specimen; they do not impose a maximum size on every plant carrying the name.
Fused Tooth: a character that becomes clearer in summer
Thomas Carow’s 2004 contribution supplied photographs to complete the registration associated with Peter D’Amato’s earlier description. Carow traced his selection to 1990 and showed a strong seasonal contrast: winter leaves could appear much like ordinary flytraps, while the fused marginal teeth became evident in summer. The accompanying discussion describes broad teeth formed by several lashes joined together. [2]
A winter inspection alone is therefore a poor basis for rejecting or confirming the name. Examine successive mature traps, recording the season, rather than treating an isolated early leaf as the definitive form.
Louchapates: flatter, regularly positioned fused teeth
Romuald Anfraix found this plant within a batch labelled ‘Fused Tooth’ acquired in 2000. Its broad, flattened teeth were more regularly positioned, with divided tips revealing their composite structure. Teeth also extended towards the far midpoint of each lobe. Vegetatively raised offspring retained the characters. Noodle Ladle is the English rendering of the name. [2]
Its diagnosis distinguishes fused lashes from the short triangular teeth of the Dentate Traps Group. Treating every short or broad tooth as the same mutation loses that distinction.
Mirror: extra structures on the back of the trap
Dieter Blancquaert noticed the plant among young purchases in 2007. The 2010 description records a range from ordinary leaves to winged, cupped or doubled traps. Double structures were most evident near the beginning and end of the growing season. The extra trap on the reverse of the normal one was reported as inactive; otherwise, growth and flowering were ordinary. Propagation was vegetative. [3]
The back of the leaf is essential to this comparison. A front-facing photograph may hide the defining feature, while an image of an exceptionally doubled leaf may exaggerate how consistently that feature appears. The diagnosis explicitly includes variability within the same cultivated line.
Coquillage: a rounded shell with a substantial rim
Guillaume Bily’s 2010 description records a plant found at Carniflora in May 2008. It combines thick lips, short widely spaced teeth and a rounded closed trap resembling a shell, usually under 3 cm long in the described material. Coquillage is French for shell, and vegetative propagation is required. [4]
The rounded outline alone is an incomplete comparison; the rim and spacing of the teeth contribute to the diagnosis.
Alien: markedly arched traps with unusual teeth
Bily found ‘Alien’ on the same 2008 visit. He described strongly arched mature traps, wing-like edges on relatively short teeth, joined distal tips, overlapping basal lobes and numerous small trigger hairs. The heavy lobes did not close effectively in his observations and could break if forced. Vegetative propagation is required. [4]
That report is a reason to observe the leaf without manually forcing it shut. It does not establish a measured capture rate or a special nutritional requirement.
Fondue: normal and distorted leaves can share one plant
Bily’s 2011 account also traces ‘Fondue’ to the 2008 Carniflora visit. The distinctive leaves have irregular, flowing outlines compared with melted material; even the leaf bases can be affected. Spring growth may be relatively ordinary, followed by more conspicuous distortion in summer and autumn, although some plants begin with distorted leaves. Vegetative propagation maintains the selection. [5]
The seasonal sequence is more informative than the word malformed. The author associated the unusual traps with poor prey capture, but the description supplies no controlled nutritional comparison. A newly distorted leaf in an unrelated plant could have another cause; this cultivar name identifies the established selection, not a general condition.
JA1: a few fused teeth in the centre of each row
Julio Alberto González Domínguez described ‘JA1’ after six years observing a plant found in 2005. The diagnosis places the few fused teeth in the middle of each row and associates their appearance with summer. Summer leaves are short and horizontal, and traps remain predominantly green. The name began as the grower’s accession code. [6]
The publication also records informal labels referring to Julio’s fused-tooth plant. Those labels should be reconciled with the documented identity instead of counted as additional cultivars. ‘JA1’ is a useful comparison for ‘Fused Tooth’, but the limited position of the fusion and the rest of the diagnosis still matter. A shared feature does not make two names interchangeable.
Coquiton: a documented cross with its own diagnosis
Alexandre Letertre’s 2015 description identifies ‘Coquiton’ as a selected ‘Coquillage’ × ‘Triton’ offspring. The low, compact plant is green to yellowish, with arched traps, short broad leaf bases and thick short teeth whose tips can bend or become distorted. Smaller intervening teeth add another feature. Occasional outgrowths may occur on the leaf base. Vegetative reproduction is required. [7]
The combined parent names explain the denomination, but the cross formula alone does not define every seedling as ‘Coquiton’. A sibling from the same parents can differ. For this selection, compare the low habit, tooth details and colour together, while retaining the supplier or propagator’s history.
What these descriptions can establish
The accounts provide reference characters and observations of particular cultivated plants. They do not establish new wild taxa, conservation categories or clinical diagnoses for damaged leaves. They also do not demonstrate the underlying genes responsible for every unusual structure. Calling a feature stable means that it persisted in the material observed; it does not mean every leaf looks identical.
For a useful collection record, photograph the entire rosette and both faces of a mature trap, then repeat through the active season. Add a close view of the teeth without crushing or triggering the leaf. Record vegetative divisions separately from seedlings. This gives future comparisons a sequence of evidence instead of one dramatic image. The linked original descriptions contain reference photographs; those images are not reproduced here.
Sources
- Steven Stewart (2004), Cupped Trap, CPN 33:84
- Thomas Carow and Romuald Anfraix (2004), Fused Tooth and Louchapates, CPN 33:100–101
- Dieter Blancquaert (2010), Mirror, CPN 39:78
- Guillaume Bily (2010), Coquillage and Alien, CPN 39:118–119
- Guillaume Bily (2011), Fondue, CPN 40:95
- Julio Alberto González Domínguez (2011), JA1, CPN 40:140
- Alexandre Letertre (2015), Coquiton, CPN 44:214
Sources checked 2 October 2026.
