Nano Nursery · Rare Carnivorous Plant Encyclopedia
Seven Venus flytrap selections illustrate an important distinction in cultivar identification: some traits recur throughout the year, while others change with the season or the age of the leaf. Crests, alternating teeth, extra trigger hairs and external trap appendages are different observations. Recording precisely where they occur makes these plants easier to compare and keeps their names attached to the right material.
Lezard Vert: persistent crests across a low plant
Lucien Blacher raised ‘Lezard Vert’ from seed germinated in 2014. His 2017 diagnosis emphasises pronounced crests along the leaf base and towards the trap, together with consistently low growth and a tendency for marginal lashes to merge. He contrasts the persistent crests with the less constant expression in ‘Schuppenstiel II’. Vegetative propagation by leaf cuttings or rhizome division is required. [1]
The comparison concerns repeated crest development, not simply one rough-looking leaf. A whole-leaf view is necessary because cropping to the open trap removes much of the diagnostic structure.
Alternance: the arrangement of teeth matters
Blacher’s ‘Alternance’, also raised from 2014 seed, has marginal teeth alternating to either side in two rows. He described a yellowish background with rose-red inner traps; under full sun the foliage became greener and the traps redder. Leaf cuttings or rhizome division preserve the selection. [1]
The name describes arrangement. It is not enough to count many teeth or notice that neighbouring teeth differ in length. Look along the margin as well as down onto the trap.
Jurasick: a compact plant with seasonally changing detail
Julien Müller discovered ‘Jurasick’ among seedlings in 2012. The 2017 account compares its trap shape with ‘Alien’, while describing very small, variably directed or sometimes absent teeth. The rosette remains compact and low. Summer growth can show notching, and the reported colour deepens from light pink in summer to darker pink late in autumn. [2]
Those observations make the whole sequence more useful than an isolated toothless trap. The author’s wordplay combines a local mountain name with the unusual appearance; it is not evidence that the plant is diseased. Nor does the resemblance to ‘Alien’ establish parentage. The description does not supply a breeding cross or controlled explanation for the altered form.
Sensor: extra trigger hairs, with a numerical caveat
Stefano Lascialfari’s 2018 account records a plant observed since 2013, combining groups of fused marginal teeth with numerous pale trigger hairs. The plant is mostly low-growing, makes many leaves and divisions, and develops green to peach rather than bright-red trap interiors. Vegetative propagation is required. [3]
The description reports six to nine trigger hairs on each lobe, but later gives twelve to fifteen per whole trap. Those ranges are not identical, so they should not be silently converted into one fixed count. The defensible diagnostic point is the abundance of trigger hairs together with the other characters. The author observed individual hairs triggering closure; the paper does not establish a quantified sensitivity advantage over other cultivars.
A useful photograph shows the interior and margin separately. The marginal teeth do not perform the same role as the sensory hairs inside the trap, and counting one cannot test a claim about the other.
Shark Mirror: extra structures that need not appear on every trap
Alexandre Letertre’s 2016 diagnosis combines external trap appendages resembling those of ‘Mirror’ with dentate, shark-like marginal teeth. It explicitly allows some ordinary traps without appendages. The plant is low and green in autumn and winter, becoming upright in spring and summer; colour otherwise varies. Vegetative propagation maintains the selection. [4]
The combined name is a description of resemblance, not a documented cross formula. A plant showing one ordinary trap has not necessarily lost its identity, because variability is part of the original account. To compare it with ‘Mirror’, retain a rear view of the trap as well as a close view of the margin. Neither image alone shows the complete combination.
Morano: a red trap with a pale crescent
Paolo Mattevi selected ‘Morano’ in 2016 from seedlings germinated in 2013. It has low leaves, bright-green bases and small red-interior traps with a distinct pale crescent as they mature. Most traps lack teeth, although the first seasonal traps can have tiny ones. The published account requires vegetative propagation through rhizome, leaf or flower-stalk cuttings. [5]
The seasonal exception is part of the diagnosis: the name does not require every leaf to be absolutely toothless.
Axe: upright early growth, lower late growth
Mattevi’s ‘Axe’ came from the same germination and selection years, but its account describes upright early growth. Tiny teeth on the first traps give way to toothless later traps, with red edging developing. Late-season traps become lower, regain teeth and show red-orange interiors. Vegetative propagation is required. [5]
The resemblance to ‘Morano’ is strongest if the seasonal history is discarded. Recording posture and mature colour alongside the teeth makes the comparison much more useful.
A practical observation sequence
Begin with a full-rosette photograph showing whether the leaves are low or upright. Add a side view of one complete mature leaf, including its base, and a top view of the open trap. For crested selections, record where the ridges begin and end. For an appendage-bearing plant, photograph the reverse of the trap. For ‘Sensor’, include a sharp view of both inner lobes.
Repeat the record through the growing season, noting division or repotting dates. Do not force a trap apart or repeatedly trigger it to make a photograph more dramatic. An isolated injured or incompletely developed leaf should not outweigh repeated healthy growth and a reliable accession history.
Keeping a distinctive selection true to its name
Where a description requires vegetative propagation, attach the cultivar label to documented clonal material. A seedling from a named parent can be recorded with that parentage without being assigned the parent’s cultivar name. Where the original account omits a propagation rule, do not invent one and attribute it to the author; retain the uncertainty and the plant’s source history.
None of these diagnoses establishes a separate species, a conservation category or a special fertiliser requirement. The published observations support identification of cultivated material. They are not measurements of optimal temperature, pest resistance or the genetic cause of every unusual structure. Use the species’ cultivation framework and the individual plant’s health record alongside the diagnosis, rather than treating an unusual silhouette as a complete care guide.
The source links provide the original reference photographs. They also allow a reader to check the exact wording when a count, seasonal exception or comparison name needs closer examination.
Sources
- Lucien Blacher (2017), Lezard Vert and Alternance, CPN 46:83–84
- Julien Müller (2017), Jurasick, CPN 46:38
- Stefano Lascialfari (2018), Sensor, CPN 47:125
- Alexandre Letertre (2016), Shark Mirror, CPN 45:120
- Paolo Mattevi (2019), Morano and Axe, CPN 48:190–191
Sources checked 2 October 2026.
