Unfortunately, I'm very suspicious of the flowers in the photo shown by Fabrice. It seems very likely that two different "types" of P. lowii were crossed to produce those two different flowers. ...... and thereby, continuing the chaos.
This issue of "sib-selfing of similar types" really needs some attention, don't you think?
I have noticed that we have a divide under our slippertalk members. Some people (including myself) think it is a good thing to cross 2 different varieties or forms of the same species, like Paph. bellatulum with Paph. bellatulum album or Paph. godefroyae with Paph. godefroyae var leuchochilum or 2 plants that are considered by some to be different species but look alike, like crossing Phrag. fischeri and Phrag. schlimii, or Paph. lowii with Paph. richardianum. Other people, including Lance Birk, who has made some very valid points thinks this is a big no no and should never be done, just because it causes too much confusion when different populations get mixed up, and over time (due to bad record keeping, or loss of labels) you can't tell if it is a true species, or a man made hybrid.
I think Lance (and others who agree with him) have some very valid points, and we should be concerned about this. However myself as a breeder, and a horticulturist do see the advantages of crossing different varieties or species that look similar together.
My reasons are the following:
1. To me the "species" concept is a man made concept. We like to put labels on things, so we can describe them better, but in my opinion species are "fluid". In nature it is sometimes hard to say where one species starts and the next begins. You always have gene flow going from one population to the next. This is one reason how new species come to being. It is natures way of creating diversity, through selection the strongest and most adapt will survive. So if this happens in nature, what is wrong if we humans do it too?
2. Sometimes if it is a rare form or a rare variety of a species, say an album form. Only one plant was ever known. An example of that would be Phrag. besseae flavum. Over time people have selfed it to create more plants. If people keep selfing or sibbing the offspring, you create inbreeding depression, and the plants will get weaker and weaker, and eventually you will end up with very sickly plants. I do not see anything wrong with crossing one of these types with a different colored form to create some vigor, or increase the size of the flowers. The next generation will be mixed (usually look like the dominant parent), but if you sib some of these some will turn out looking like the flavum or albino parent.
3. I am propagating plants to be sold to hobby growers, and not in the intent on replanting them in the natural habitat. I can see that would be a problem, if you say cross a leuchochilum with a regular godefroyae, and then replant the offspring in an area were leuchochilums grow native. As I am growing them for the hobby grower I am trying to create a plant that has more vigor, and I am also trying to create some variation, so I can select for different traits, like darker flower color, larger flowers, disease resistance etc. By crossing different populations I create more variation, and thus I can select for these traits.
Now I do think it is very important to keep records, so if for some reason a plant gets described as a different species or a different variety, you can change your labels. As an example when besseae's first came out, they may not have realized they also has dalesandroi in their collection, so when they were crossing the 2 plants they assumed they were both besseae, and assumed the offspring were all besseae, while infact they had just made the hybrid Phrag. Jersey. This can lead to a mess when records are not kept correctly, and I can see Lance's point of view that this can lead to a total disaster.
Now I want other peoples thoughts (both pros and cons) on this, and what can be done to not create chaos as Lance said.
Robert
