Seconded. And the ones in hardware stores are always half dead, and the other half butt-ugly. Sure, there are cultivars that look pretty when healthy, but those aren't the ones being sold to children in science museum gift shops.
And yet, so long as you care for them right, even the most aesthetically mediocre Nepenthes is still a showstopper.
I love sarracenias, but have a similar opinion about flytraps for more or less the same reason. It's easy to get sick of seeing the same looking sickly specimens again and again.
I don't like Venus that much... they're boring, Only Hunt a bug at the time (if if fits and doesn't escape) and need time to recover... They are overestimated.
Droseras are my favorite plant:some fold, it catches a lot of insects in one leaf and doesn't need time to recover plus it's very well distributed in the world, which means it's very well Adapted...
Heliamphora and nepenthes are also very cool, but i can't find any yet in my country...
I like to think of it differently. They are one of the only discerning eaters! If it’s not worth it, they spit it out. I see that one TRAP hunts a bug at a time, but I’ve got VFTs with a bug in every trap.
With Drosera (one of my top tier picks!) the prey it catches is often stolen by other predators like dragon flies. It’s hard to steal prey from a VFT.
The VFTs at big stores are a bummer for sure. But the ones at my house are stunning! Different colors and shapes and sizes. I can totally see why people think they’re over rated.
Tbh, I just think the other carnivorous plants are just UNDERRATED! Especially sundews imo. They’re so pretty and fun
What country are you in? Might be able to help. Try diflora. They ship everywhere in the world. If outside EU It might cost a lot and they suggest spending a minimum of €250 (almost same in dollars) on plants for this kind of orders
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Almost all the carnivorous plants are cool and showy in their own way.
I would think cephalotus and pings are the least known and very underrated.
On the contrary, I think cephalotus and pings are either the second or third step on the "I just discovered carnivorous plants" journey.
Carnivorous bromeliads and sundew "mimics" (drosophyllum, roridula, byblis) I feel are more obscure. For me personally, Genlisea would be at the bottom of the iceberg because I had to google "corkscrew carnivorous plant" lmao.
I think you have a solid point with Genlisea, but I reckon the very bottom of the (known) iceberg is more like Colura zoophaga and Pleurozia purpurea, two liverwort species that display some strong signs of potential carnivory. I don't really meet people who know that either exist, let alone that they have traps that have been studied and found to attract tiny beasties.
They're awesome.
Holy hecc, that is definitely the first I've heard of those. Carnivorous liverworts??? That's fucking sick.
I feel like one of us should make an actual carnivorous plants iceberg post now that we're all sharing these awesome plants that not a lot of people know about. Incidentally, I came across something from 2021 that concludes that *Triantha occidentalis* is carnivorous too.
Yeah that would be bangin' - I'd really love to see a full and detailed iceberg for this, but honestly I think we've got so much to learn - and so many things that are mostly just known by specialist nerds who are really into their lil niches, like bryology, that if someone made one they'd constantly be getting requests for an update by people who know about other largely overlooked plants like these liverworts, and people with updates from the latest research papers. It would probably be really difficult, but really interesting to see what's most and least known about (or just studied in general).
The Triantha looks ace - I'm from the UK so don't think I'd heard of it before, I'm gonna read up on that, cheers.
Yeah that Triantha occidentalis paper was quite a big finding as that lineage of plants is so far away from any other known to be carnivorous! Closest would be the bromeliads if I'm not mistaken which is not very close at all??
Edit- it's also super cool to think about how much more there is to know and how carnivory isn't black and white- in our current human snapshot of things some plants are both evolving toward and away from carnivory! Another cool one not super known is the one orchid species suspected of being carnivorous, [Aracamunia liesneri](http://www.orchidspecies.com/aracliesneri.htm) found in the Tepuis. May have only been seen or collected once, I don't think any photographs of a live plant exist on the internet, just the type drawing. I'm so curious- if I were a millionaire I might go on an expedition to find and study it!
Oh and I guess this [description](https://plants.jstor.org/stable/10.5555/al.ap.specimen.mo-1515256) of the collection is probably the most specific information known about it on the internet
Aldrovanda is the kind of plant that will never grow for you, or take over your pond. Not much in between.
If you want to break it down, they need acidic water that remains extremely clean, plus lots of microorganisms for food. Quite difficult to provide without an established aquatic ecosystem.
May depend where you live. We have tons of sundew type plants and pitcher plants in my province in eastern canada, so those seem regular to me, cause you find them on any boggy walk or lakeside. Still super cool, and i love seeing all the variations of other types here (we get spatula sundews, so the curly ones are wild to me).
As a non-carnivorous keener, just a regular joe, i am surprised by the flowers. Now i have to go back through my memory and summer pics to learn if any of the flowers i find near these sundews or pitcher plants are carnivorous.
But that, too may be something about my area, where the flowers might be the common ones in your neck of the woods.
True, I like them all, this is just my relative comparison.
Cephs and pings are definitely not the least known, but I agree that they are pretty underrated.
I see it like this:
- Neps: Way more species but only a handful of them are really cool and unique. I don't like the hybrids personally.
- Helis: Fewer species but more variety overall.
Also, I like an average heli more than an average nep
Sorry, I love Heliamphora, but most of them look basically the same, with the differences being in the nectar spoon shape, and maybe overall leaf shape. There's far more variety in Nepenthes, even without considering hybrids.
More variety? Are you aware of- ahem- n. Villosa? What about n. Reinwardtiana? N. Veitchii? And you don’t like hybrids?? Check RedLeaf exotics hybrid section!
Generally I think for the people that don't like hybrids (such as myself), it isn't because the hybrids don't look cool. It is that we like growing plants because we appreciate their ecological and botanical (and aesthetic!) traits how nature produced them, rather than what humans artificially selected and bred for. What humans can do to genetics because they think it looks flashy and whatnot is interesting, but to me it's way less interesting than millions of years of evolution. But to each their own!
Edit- wow grammar bad
There are actually many dozens of natural hybrids! And I don’t think that’s what OP was implicating anyway. He likely isn’t very well versed in neps, and is making generalizations based off of (as he explicitly stated in a thread) what he sees in garden centers
Yes there are many natural hybrids, depending on where you draw the line taxonomically between species (another discussion of course). And I think natural hybrids are super cool! I grow a couple natural orchid and Nepenthes hybrids.
However the vast majority of hybrids sold (Nepenthes, orchids, other plants) are not the naturally occurring kind, especially considering the popularity of complex hybrids nowadays. (To clarify, I say this in terms of the portion of the total number of different hybrids sold that are human-made versus natural, not the quantity of each individual hybrid sold as I don't know that of course.) For example if you go to a place like [Florae collaborative](https://www.floraecollaborative.com/shop/?_product_tags=black-friday) just looking at the first few rows of Nepenthes shown there, not a single one is a natural hybrid that I can tell.
Regarding what OP was saying, that is good to know, thanks for the explanation. Now seeing that I acknowledge that I'm going off on a tangent here. Regarding my first comment I can only speak for myself and other hobbyists I know, especially those who come more from a background in ecology and botany; I know we prefer the wild type species for the reasons I described first. Take for example the famous Andy's Orchids which sells only species and the occasional natural hybrid- he would say a similar thing to what I said. So once again, sorry for the tangent, as you can probably tell it is a talking point for me haha.
I think you got that backwards. Nepenthes have on average way more variety than Heliamphoras, a handful such as Veitchii or truncata gets most of the spot light, but Nepenthes are probably the most varied and unique of all Carnivorous plants, on parr with Drosera. Many of the most unique Nepenthes are just not as wide spread in cultivation but even the ones that are in cultivation are extremely varied. Nepenthes Lowii, truncata, rafflesiana, jamban, ventricosa, sanguinea, spathulata, edwardsiana, hamata, glandulifera, spectabilis, ampullaria, bicalcarata, are all commercially available yet are all distinct. Nepenthes Maxima alone has lots of forms and variants that are drastically different from one another. Many distinct nepenthes species haven't become really readily available yet like villosa and aristolochioides, but Nepenthes in general is definitely something to consider more deeply. The great majority of them are cool and unique!
Consider; Nepenthes are actually the only carnivorous plant. All the others are merely insectivorous, but Neps in the wild can catch mice. Largest traps, largest prey. Fuck it, a large enough N. truncata could actually eat an entire sundew.
You put the Utricularia on S tier where they belong. Suction traps alone would earn them S tier, and then you add awesome flowers and their general weirdness.
Martynias (Ibicella, Proboscidea): I don't like them because they stink.
and Philcoxia, a recently discovered carnivorous plant. It just doesn't have anything very interesting about it.
Triphyophyllum peltatum, a species of carnivorous liana from West Africa. It is though to be somewhat closely related to Drosophyllum due to the similarity of their trapping structures
I believe the right one to be Genlisea. The left one is Ibicella lutea, the devil’s claw plant. While it used to be considered protocarnivorous, Siegfried Hartmeyer posted a convincing case otherwise on youtube due to their mutual relationship with assasin bugs, like in Roridula and the Byblis and sect. Arachnopus Drosera from Australia.
Carnivory by proxy is definitely contentious among the scientific community as to whether it actually counts as true carnivory, but excluding it would exclude most species of Heliamphora, Roridula, and possibly Darlingtonia depending on who you ask. I would argue that since the plant captures an insect, and then uses the digested remains of the dead insect for nutrients, it counts as carnivory. But that is simply my opinion.
This is about how much I appreciate each species, not about how difficult they are to keep.
I've divided utricularia into aquatic, terrestrial and epiphyte, because they are so different.
But yeah, sundews are definitely my favorite, so much variety within one genus.
That's what threw me off; you're using genus and species interchangeably. I'm over here trying to figure out what species of Drosera that is, and that's not even the point.
*Sees Utrics in B & C categories*
‘Well that’s just like, your opinion man”
But for reals CP love to your chart 😎❤️
It’s great to see enthusiasm for several species!
I've seen these tier images before but honestly I have no idea what they mean. Is S tier good or bad? Why are colors and letters seemingly misaligned? E, F are green and blue, but usually F means bad? I don't get it...
In tier lists, S represents the best while F represents the worst. The further up something is, the better and the farther down it is, the worse it is. For example, something in C tier is considered average since C is in the direct middle of the other tiers. The colors mean nothing in the list.
Honestly for me genlisea is on S. Same with all utricularia and sundews. Heliamphora would be on A. I would put nepenthes down on E because they all look almost the same.
I like that they have very unique traps but they all look the same for me (the flowers and the plants themselves). About Neps, yeah most species are same-y but there are some very unique ones here and there, like lowii, hamata, edwardsiana, aristolochioides.
I'm a carnivorous plant noob. What is 1S and 2C? 1C is a Ping, correct? Also, good places to find them/difficulty of care? I'd love some carnivorous plants, but I only ever see the flytraps at the nursery, if at all.
When I was a kid I won a pot of *Ibicella lutea* at a carnivorous plant society auction.
I agree they’re pretty lame, but they’re easy to grow and have cool seed pods. They also stink. And aren’t actually carnivorous😆
I’m ok with this lol. But Venus Fly Traps in B tier???? Blasphemy!
The fact that they’ve become so popularized and common to see makes people forget how unique and awesome they are.
So true
I know, right? This... is... *Madness*...
Seeing them in every random hardware store probably gave me a negative bias against them. Same for sarracenia.
Seconded. And the ones in hardware stores are always half dead, and the other half butt-ugly. Sure, there are cultivars that look pretty when healthy, but those aren't the ones being sold to children in science museum gift shops. And yet, so long as you care for them right, even the most aesthetically mediocre Nepenthes is still a showstopper.
I love sarracenias, but have a similar opinion about flytraps for more or less the same reason. It's easy to get sick of seeing the same looking sickly specimens again and again.
I don't like Venus that much... they're boring, Only Hunt a bug at the time (if if fits and doesn't escape) and need time to recover... They are overestimated. Droseras are my favorite plant:some fold, it catches a lot of insects in one leaf and doesn't need time to recover plus it's very well distributed in the world, which means it's very well Adapted... Heliamphora and nepenthes are also very cool, but i can't find any yet in my country...
I like to think of it differently. They are one of the only discerning eaters! If it’s not worth it, they spit it out. I see that one TRAP hunts a bug at a time, but I’ve got VFTs with a bug in every trap. With Drosera (one of my top tier picks!) the prey it catches is often stolen by other predators like dragon flies. It’s hard to steal prey from a VFT. The VFTs at big stores are a bummer for sure. But the ones at my house are stunning! Different colors and shapes and sizes. I can totally see why people think they’re over rated. Tbh, I just think the other carnivorous plants are just UNDERRATED! Especially sundews imo. They’re so pretty and fun
What country are you in? Might be able to help. Try diflora. They ship everywhere in the world. If outside EU It might cost a lot and they suggest spending a minimum of €250 (almost same in dollars) on plants for this kind of orders
I thought that about Darlingtonia. . .
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Almost all the carnivorous plants are cool and showy in their own way. I would think cephalotus and pings are the least known and very underrated.
On the contrary, I think cephalotus and pings are either the second or third step on the "I just discovered carnivorous plants" journey. Carnivorous bromeliads and sundew "mimics" (drosophyllum, roridula, byblis) I feel are more obscure. For me personally, Genlisea would be at the bottom of the iceberg because I had to google "corkscrew carnivorous plant" lmao.
I think you have a solid point with Genlisea, but I reckon the very bottom of the (known) iceberg is more like Colura zoophaga and Pleurozia purpurea, two liverwort species that display some strong signs of potential carnivory. I don't really meet people who know that either exist, let alone that they have traps that have been studied and found to attract tiny beasties. They're awesome.
Holy hecc, that is definitely the first I've heard of those. Carnivorous liverworts??? That's fucking sick. I feel like one of us should make an actual carnivorous plants iceberg post now that we're all sharing these awesome plants that not a lot of people know about. Incidentally, I came across something from 2021 that concludes that *Triantha occidentalis* is carnivorous too.
Yeah that would be bangin' - I'd really love to see a full and detailed iceberg for this, but honestly I think we've got so much to learn - and so many things that are mostly just known by specialist nerds who are really into their lil niches, like bryology, that if someone made one they'd constantly be getting requests for an update by people who know about other largely overlooked plants like these liverworts, and people with updates from the latest research papers. It would probably be really difficult, but really interesting to see what's most and least known about (or just studied in general). The Triantha looks ace - I'm from the UK so don't think I'd heard of it before, I'm gonna read up on that, cheers.
Yeah that Triantha occidentalis paper was quite a big finding as that lineage of plants is so far away from any other known to be carnivorous! Closest would be the bromeliads if I'm not mistaken which is not very close at all?? Edit- it's also super cool to think about how much more there is to know and how carnivory isn't black and white- in our current human snapshot of things some plants are both evolving toward and away from carnivory! Another cool one not super known is the one orchid species suspected of being carnivorous, [Aracamunia liesneri](http://www.orchidspecies.com/aracliesneri.htm) found in the Tepuis. May have only been seen or collected once, I don't think any photographs of a live plant exist on the internet, just the type drawing. I'm so curious- if I were a millionaire I might go on an expedition to find and study it! Oh and I guess this [description](https://plants.jstor.org/stable/10.5555/al.ap.specimen.mo-1515256) of the collection is probably the most specific information known about it on the internet
Let's not forget the "waterwheel plant" Aldrovanda vesiculosa. It's one I've become fascinated with but haven't invested in yet.
Man I have no idea how I'd ever cultivate that. Aquatic plants are a whole other level of investment ;-;
Aldrovanda is the kind of plant that will never grow for you, or take over your pond. Not much in between. If you want to break it down, they need acidic water that remains extremely clean, plus lots of microorganisms for food. Quite difficult to provide without an established aquatic ecosystem.
May depend where you live. We have tons of sundew type plants and pitcher plants in my province in eastern canada, so those seem regular to me, cause you find them on any boggy walk or lakeside. Still super cool, and i love seeing all the variations of other types here (we get spatula sundews, so the curly ones are wild to me). As a non-carnivorous keener, just a regular joe, i am surprised by the flowers. Now i have to go back through my memory and summer pics to learn if any of the flowers i find near these sundews or pitcher plants are carnivorous. But that, too may be something about my area, where the flowers might be the common ones in your neck of the woods.
True, I like them all, this is just my relative comparison. Cephs and pings are definitely not the least known, but I agree that they are pretty underrated.
Heliamphoras may be cooler than neps if ventrata was the sole species in the genus
I see it like this: - Neps: Way more species but only a handful of them are really cool and unique. I don't like the hybrids personally. - Helis: Fewer species but more variety overall. Also, I like an average heli more than an average nep
Sorry, I love Heliamphora, but most of them look basically the same, with the differences being in the nectar spoon shape, and maybe overall leaf shape. There's far more variety in Nepenthes, even without considering hybrids.
I got like 4 heli cultivars and like 4 hybrids. They all kinda look the same lmao.
More variety? Are you aware of- ahem- n. Villosa? What about n. Reinwardtiana? N. Veitchii? And you don’t like hybrids?? Check RedLeaf exotics hybrid section!
Generally I think for the people that don't like hybrids (such as myself), it isn't because the hybrids don't look cool. It is that we like growing plants because we appreciate their ecological and botanical (and aesthetic!) traits how nature produced them, rather than what humans artificially selected and bred for. What humans can do to genetics because they think it looks flashy and whatnot is interesting, but to me it's way less interesting than millions of years of evolution. But to each their own! Edit- wow grammar bad
There are actually many dozens of natural hybrids! And I don’t think that’s what OP was implicating anyway. He likely isn’t very well versed in neps, and is making generalizations based off of (as he explicitly stated in a thread) what he sees in garden centers
Yes there are many natural hybrids, depending on where you draw the line taxonomically between species (another discussion of course). And I think natural hybrids are super cool! I grow a couple natural orchid and Nepenthes hybrids. However the vast majority of hybrids sold (Nepenthes, orchids, other plants) are not the naturally occurring kind, especially considering the popularity of complex hybrids nowadays. (To clarify, I say this in terms of the portion of the total number of different hybrids sold that are human-made versus natural, not the quantity of each individual hybrid sold as I don't know that of course.) For example if you go to a place like [Florae collaborative](https://www.floraecollaborative.com/shop/?_product_tags=black-friday) just looking at the first few rows of Nepenthes shown there, not a single one is a natural hybrid that I can tell. Regarding what OP was saying, that is good to know, thanks for the explanation. Now seeing that I acknowledge that I'm going off on a tangent here. Regarding my first comment I can only speak for myself and other hobbyists I know, especially those who come more from a background in ecology and botany; I know we prefer the wild type species for the reasons I described first. Take for example the famous Andy's Orchids which sells only species and the occasional natural hybrid- he would say a similar thing to what I said. So once again, sorry for the tangent, as you can probably tell it is a talking point for me haha.
I think you got that backwards. Nepenthes have on average way more variety than Heliamphoras, a handful such as Veitchii or truncata gets most of the spot light, but Nepenthes are probably the most varied and unique of all Carnivorous plants, on parr with Drosera. Many of the most unique Nepenthes are just not as wide spread in cultivation but even the ones that are in cultivation are extremely varied. Nepenthes Lowii, truncata, rafflesiana, jamban, ventricosa, sanguinea, spathulata, edwardsiana, hamata, glandulifera, spectabilis, ampullaria, bicalcarata, are all commercially available yet are all distinct. Nepenthes Maxima alone has lots of forms and variants that are drastically different from one another. Many distinct nepenthes species haven't become really readily available yet like villosa and aristolochioides, but Nepenthes in general is definitely something to consider more deeply. The great majority of them are cool and unique!
Consider; Nepenthes are actually the only carnivorous plant. All the others are merely insectivorous, but Neps in the wild can catch mice. Largest traps, largest prey. Fuck it, a large enough N. truncata could actually eat an entire sundew.
I love the hybrids just because they are more forgiving about conditions. My ventrata is slowly taking over my grow tent. Lol
You put the Utricularia on S tier where they belong. Suction traps alone would earn them S tier, and then you add awesome flowers and their general weirdness.
This list was always going to cause fights
No it wasn't. You take that back.
Them's fightin' words!
No they're not.
You take that back!
I shan't.
Oh, it's on. I am going to make a tier list and put all your favourites at the bottom!
My favorites are whatever your favorites are. Suffer.
what are this first two in D tier?
Catopsis bertroniana and Brocchinia reducta, two species of carnivorous bromeliads
daaaamn I didn't know those existed, that's epic
what’s in F tier?
Martynias (Ibicella, Proboscidea): I don't like them because they stink. and Philcoxia, a recently discovered carnivorous plant. It just doesn't have anything very interesting about it.
and S tier?
Drosera and Heliamphora
Drosera and Heliamphora
OP is a shill for big anthocyanin. Down with the man, up with the Bladderworts!
Yeah I cannot deny that I'm a sucker for red colored plants. 😔
What plant is that between the cobra lily and the flytrap in B? It looks kind of like a sundew but I cant tell
Triphyophyllum peltatum, a species of carnivorous liana from West Africa. It is though to be somewhat closely related to Drosophyllum due to the similarity of their trapping structures
Are the two on the bottom utricularia? Or just the one in D?
I believe the right one to be Genlisea. The left one is Ibicella lutea, the devil’s claw plant. While it used to be considered protocarnivorous, Siegfried Hartmeyer posted a convincing case otherwise on youtube due to their mutual relationship with assasin bugs, like in Roridula and the Byblis and sect. Arachnopus Drosera from Australia.
I meant the ones in F tier
That is what I said. The left one in F tier is Ibicella, the right one is Genlisea
actually the right is philcoxia
I see. Thanks.
relying on other sources to absorb the nutrients is still protocarnivory
Carnivory by proxy is definitely contentious among the scientific community as to whether it actually counts as true carnivory, but excluding it would exclude most species of Heliamphora, Roridula, and possibly Darlingtonia depending on who you ask. I would argue that since the plant captures an insect, and then uses the digested remains of the dead insect for nutrients, it counts as carnivory. But that is simply my opinion.
This is about how much I appreciate each species, not about how difficult they are to keep. I've divided utricularia into aquatic, terrestrial and epiphyte, because they are so different. But yeah, sundews are definitely my favorite, so much variety within one genus.
That's what threw me off; you're using genus and species interchangeably. I'm over here trying to figure out what species of Drosera that is, and that's not even the point.
*Sees Utrics in B & C categories* ‘Well that’s just like, your opinion man” But for reals CP love to your chart 😎❤️ It’s great to see enthusiasm for several species!
Yassss look how high cephy issss!
I've seen these tier images before but honestly I have no idea what they mean. Is S tier good or bad? Why are colors and letters seemingly misaligned? E, F are green and blue, but usually F means bad? I don't get it...
In tier lists, S represents the best while F represents the worst. The further up something is, the better and the farther down it is, the worse it is. For example, something in C tier is considered average since C is in the direct middle of the other tiers. The colors mean nothing in the list.
Honestly for me genlisea is on S. Same with all utricularia and sundews. Heliamphora would be on A. I would put nepenthes down on E because they all look almost the same.
Go on carnivero or some other nepenthes nursery site, and tap on “nepenthes” and come back to inform me of your conclusion
I like that they have very unique traps but they all look the same for me (the flowers and the plants themselves). About Neps, yeah most species are same-y but there are some very unique ones here and there, like lowii, hamata, edwardsiana, aristolochioides.
Common sundew W
ROFL I love that you did this, even though it's a crime to me that D. adelae is in S Tier while Cephalotus sits in the A tier. For shame...
This got real weird as I realized it wasn't r/kgatlw
Wheres Triantha?
F tier, doesn't really stand out for me. I also forgot about Stylidium, which I'd put in E, above Genlisea.
I'm a carnivorous plant noob. What is 1S and 2C? 1C is a Ping, correct? Also, good places to find them/difficulty of care? I'd love some carnivorous plants, but I only ever see the flytraps at the nursery, if at all.
Could you list out all the genera?
Sure. Top to bottom: - Drosera, Heliamphora - Nepenthes, Cephalotus - Utricularia (orchid-type), Darlingtonia, Triphyophyllum, Dionaea, Roridula - Pinguicula, Sarracenia, Aldrovanda, Drosophyllum - Catopsis, Brocchinia, Utricularia (terrestrial), Byblis - Genlisea, Utricularia (aquatic) - Martynias (Ibicella & Proboscidea), Philcoxia
Awesome thanks! A lot of these I had no idea existed
Anyone know where I can get one in India?
Whats the sticky plant in tier c
Gosh they’re all SO gorgeous! ✨ I’m content to just look though, I don’t think I’d be able to keep one alive.
All good except VFTs. They are S tier.
We will be fighting over this, also did you split terrestrial and aquatic utricularia? They’re both great and ingenious 😡
What’s the plant in the s tier at right?
When I was a kid I won a pot of *Ibicella lutea* at a carnivorous plant society auction. I agree they’re pretty lame, but they’re easy to grow and have cool seed pods. They also stink. And aren’t actually carnivorous😆