are slipper orchids really orchids?

[likespaphs]

i've heard the argument that if the slippers were discovered today, they are different enough in some areas that they probably would not be considered orchids.
of course i have nothing to show to elaborate on this but does anyone have some concrete facts on this or thoughts?

 

[emydura]

i've heard the argument that if the slippers were discovered today, they are different enough in some areas that they probably would not be considered orchids.
of course i have nothing to show to elaborate on this but does anyone have some concrete facts on this or thoughts?

I have heard that too. That some taxonomists don't consider Paphs to be orchids. Interested as well in what others have to say.

David

 

[Shiva]

You will always find experts contradicting other experts no matter what the issue is. Look at any trial, there are experts for the Defence and experts for the Prosecution, all arriving at opposite conclusions with the same facts.
I wouldn't lose any sleep over this. :snore:

 

[Braem]

i've heard the argument that if the slippers were discovered today, they are different enough in some areas that they probably would not be considered orchids.
of course i have nothing to show to elaborate on this but does anyone have some concrete facts on this or thoughts?

That argument is as old as 1831 or 1833 (I forget which) ... John Lindley separated them as a autonomous genus in Nixus Plantarum. But again (the old story) there are no rules were to draw the line in plant taxonomy.

 

[NYEric]

Sounds stupid to me!

 

[Marc]

I sign on for the: I've heard that story as well club

 

[Braem]

Why would that sound stupid ? .... we separate genera and species on much smaller differences ... Dahlgren et al, and Vermeulen didn't find it stupid ... and neither do I ... then "Orchids" will be Orchidales and there will be three families (a) Aspostasieae with three fertile anthers, (b) Cypripedieae with two fertile anthers, and (c) Orchidaceae with one fertile anther.

Its like women ... blondes, brunettes, redheads ... but they are all women ...

all you do is change the levels, nothing more ...

 

[Rick]

I think another possible split would be with groups that have separate male and female flowers (like Catesetum) since one basic premise of what makes an orchid an orchid is that the male/female parts fused into a single structure (the column). So wouldn't that make the Catesetum flower an exception to the rule?

Maybe you can tell me Guido. Are Dimorphicus (lowii) flowers single sex or just differentially fertile for other reasons?

 

[Kavanaru]

I think another possible split would be with groups that have separate male and female flowers (like Catesetum) since one basic premise of what makes an orchid an orchid is that the male/female parts fused into a single structure (the column). So wouldn't that make the Catesetum flower an exception to the rule?

Maybe you can tell me Guido. Are Dimorphicus (lowii) flowers single sex or just differentially fertile for other reasons?

not really, as teh point is that the male/female flowers of catasetinae are not true male or female flowers... basically, one of the sexes is just... hhhmmm... have forgotten the terminoloy in english... let's say not developed...

from time to time, however, you get flowers ith both male and female viable characters, and or anything in between...

 

[Lanmark]

Ah this has nothing to do with the discussion at hand, yet I can't seem to resist saying it...

All this "scientific" binomial nomenclature, ever-changing and ever-confusing, and yet a Fuukiran is always a Fuukiran. :evil: oke:

:wink:

 

[Braem]

I think another possible split would be with groups that have separate male and female flowers (like Catesetum) since one basic premise of what makes an orchid an orchid is that the male/female parts fused into a single structure (the column). So wouldn't that make the Catesetum flower an exception to the rule?

Maybe you can tell me Guido. Are Dimorphicus (lowii) flowers single sex or just differentially fertile for other reasons?

I am afraid I can't agree with that, because those cases are just exceptions, whereas ALL slippers have two fertile anthers.

 

[Braem]

I think another possible split would be with groups that have separate male and female flowers (like Catesetum) since one basic premise of what makes an orchid an orchid is that the male/female parts fused into a single structure (the column). So wouldn't that make the Catesetum flower an exception to the rule?

Maybe you can tell me Guido. Are Dimorphicus (lowii) flowers single sex or just differentially fertile for other reasons?

And of course, one can control what flowers wil be produced by changing the cultural conditions ... and that is not the case with the slippers,

 

[Braem]

Ah this has nothing to do with the discussion at hand, yet I can't seem to resist saying it...

All this "scientific" binomial nomenclature, ever-changing and ever-confusing, and yet a Fuukiran is always a Fuukiran. :evil: oke:

:wink:

Well yes ... an apple is always an apple, even if you call it a cherry ... but binominal nomenclature is the best there is. There has been many systems ... but they all disappeared because they did not work. Binominal nomenclature does work, and it is the "systematics" that causes problems as no-one is able to define a plant species ... but that does not change anything to binominal nomenclature. Just don't get the two confused.

 

[Braem]

About the "dimorphicus" flowers: In my opinion they are just a variation on the theme ... but I must admit that I have never looked into that specific problem.

 

[emydura]

You will always find experts contradicting other experts no matter what the issue is. Look at any trial, there are experts for the Defence and experts for the Prosecution, all arriving at opposite conclusions with the same facts.
I wouldn't lose any sleep over this. :snore:

I don't think anyone is losing sleep over this. It is just an interesting topic. Whether a Paphiopedilum is an orchid or not isn't that important to me. Obviously taxonomists in the past have had differing views on the taxonomy of Paphs. I'm still not clear on why they did not consider Paphs to be orchids. I remember being told that it was believed Paphs were much more closely related to a non-orchid genera. I can't tremember which, but it was a common garden/vegetable plant.

David

 

[Rick]

not really, as teh point is that the male/female flowers of catasetinae are not true male or female flowers... basically, one of the sexes is just... hhhmmm... have forgotten the terminoloy in english... let's say not developed...

from time to time, however, you get flowers ith both male and female viable characters, and or anything in between...

Ok I can go for that.

 

[Lanmark]

Well yes ... an apple is always an apple, even if you call it a cherry ... but binominal nomenclature is the best there is. There has been many systems ... but they all disappeared because they did not work. Binominal nomenclature does work, and it is the "systematics" that causes problems as no-one is able to define a plant species ... but that does not change anything to binominal nomenclature. Just don't get the two confused.

Agreed. Binomial nomenclature is the best there is. Some of us around here, however, recently got called to task by another member for using the term Fuukiran instead of leading with the name Neofinetia falcata in our posts. We were accused of using poor form. I'm just being an obstinate old mule in making my point that the term Fuukiran has been in use since before the time binomial nomenclature was invented, and the term Fuukiran is still in use today. It still means the same thing it always meant. The Meikan system is still going strong too. It classifies all the variations within this one single species quite nicely. :wink: Feel free to ignore me as I make my point which is clearly out of context with the rest of this thread.
My apologies. I'll shut up now. My intent is not to hijack this thread.

 

[KyushuCalanthe]

Well, I was talking to a Cyp. arietinum once and it told it me that he definitely WASN'T an orchid. So...

 

[paphioboy]

Well, I was talking to a Cyp. arietinum once and it told it me that he definitely WASN'T an orchid. So...

I concur... :rollhappy: Who cares whether they are orchids or not? They've got all of us hooked for life... Pesonally I think they're veggies from outer space...

 

[cnycharles]

I concur... :rollhappy: Who cares whether they are orchids or not? They've got all of us hooked for life... Pesonally I think they're veggies from outer space...

actually from what I've seen, we're the vegetables...