helenae x fairrieanum

[labskaus]

Hi all,

since Ross has posted some of his Barbi-Dolls on a couple of occassions and since we had this thread
http://www.slippertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=9767

I thought I'd post these for comparison. Franz Glanz had a sales table at our last judging session, and on it where a bunch of flowering helenae x fairrieanum:

I find them quite similar to Ross' flowers, actually.

Best wishes, Carsten

 

[biothanasis]

Very beautiful!!!!!

 

[paphjoint]

Very nice thanks for posting

 

[SlipperKing]

Carsten,
It looks very much like Maya's plant from the other thread. Amazingly so.

 

[Roy]

I may draw harsh comment but to me this cross was a waste of time.

 

[goldenrose]

..... don't know unless one tries!

 

[labskaus]

Roy, I agree this is not a cross I'd call an improvement over either parent. Well, the last one actually was o.k., and all flowers were larger than the average fairrieanum. And Goldenrose is right, you never know before you try.
Actually, for me this was a "must" cross for those who venture into compact paph breeding. Somebody was to waste his time

Best wishes, Carsten

 

[Candace]

The last one is o.k. but the dorsals seem to be iffy on the others. Interesting primary. Thanks for posting.

 

[Ross]

I may draw harsh comment but to me this cross was a waste of time.

As an end in itself, Roy, I could agree with you. But the plants in general have very small growth habit and select flowers are quite flat. The fairrieanum parent evidently does a pretty good job of eliminating the reflexed dorsal of the helenae.

 

[Ross]

I find them quite similar to Ross' flowers, actually.

Best wishes, Carsten

When I first bought these plants, I suspected that they may have been (helenae x fairrieanum) instead of Barbi-Doll (barbigerum x fairrieanum) due to the appearance of the leaves. Clackamas originated and registered the hybrid. Do any members from the Pacific Northwest have a Barbi-Doll from them for comparison?

 

[Roy]

As an end in itself, Roy, I could agree with you. But the plants in general have very small growth habit and select flowers are quite flat. The fairrieanum parent evidently does a pretty good job of eliminating the reflexed dorsal of the helenae.

I agree the attempt to broaden the small growth habit of Paphs so that many flowers can be enjoyed from a plant in a tiny pot. The problem as I see it is that the hybridist has NOT reviewed the parents individually to assess their dominance in breeding. Plants such as fairrieanum, helenae, barbigerum and henryanum for example have been used in many crosses. Each of these 4 plants can be seen as being dominant in the majority if not all their progeny. This is the key flaw in many hybridists today, they don't do the proper homework or they are just using the name value.
As an experiment the cross may have been worth it, IF, the green fairrieanum ( assuming a red fairy parent) had been used given that helenae, from previous crosses loves being mated with greens or yellow type colors, RED fairrieanum enjoys mating to other reds. From art class I remember mixing yellow & red and getting nice colors BUT the same principle doesn't apply to orchids.

 

[SlipperFan]

It's different. Perhaps we'd like it better if the color contrast were stronger.

 

[Roy]

Futher to my lasy post in regards to color matching, a prime example of my note is the thread, venustum x helenae. P. venustum alba apparently has been used and the colors are good and clean. If the fairy red was used here, then its a great example of what not to use.

 

[Eric Muehlbauer]

I could see this cross being better with fairreanum as a parent and helenae as a grandparent....Eric

 

[Corbin]

They were breeding them for their ability to keep from sliding off of steep slopes. oke:

 

[Kevin]

I don't quite understand why this cross was 'a waste of time', or that 'we'd like it better if...' Didn't this cross turn out exactly like it should have? Isn't beauty in the eye of the beholder? Isn't the breeder the only one who can say if it was a waste of his or her time? For example, I have a Paph. Lathmanianum (spicerianum x villosum), that I really like. But, during one show, a judge passed it over (for ribbon judging), because the dorsal folded back too much. Isn't that the point?! spicerianum is a parent - that's what it does! One person's 'improvement' is another person's failure. So, again, what exactly is 'wrong' with these pics of (helenae x fairrieanum)?

 

[Roy]

Kevin, apart from the plant remaining somewhat small, the flowers on show have neither the shape, color nor quality of either parent. If the breeder wanted dull, uninteresting color, they got it. As in my previous post, if the breeder had studied the results of previous similar crossings they wouldn't have used as suspected, a red fairrieanum. IMO, primary hybrid crosses like these without an understanding of the habits of the parents, which have been displayed for a long time, produce flowers that are less than those produced in the early part of last century.
P. Lathamianum is a nice orchid but whether the judge knows or understands Paphs is another question and particularly what class it would be judged for a ribbon. To compare Lathamianum against the flowers here is like chalk & cheese.

 

[Corbin]

Exactly, and only from comments made on this forum, it seems IMO that all flowers are getting judged based on their merits according to some "ideal" flower instead of judging them based on their measuring up to their species or their complex. As I said in another thread everybody wants "cheerleaders," to use Ernie's terminology.

 

[slippertalker]

I look at these flowers as the result of an interesting experiment. The flowers are valuable in the sense that we learn the influence of helenae with every step. Usually Paph helenae has a pretty dominant influence but in this case Paph fairreanum has contributed an equal share of traits.

Not every cross is an award quality project, but they are quite revealing in their results. The key is to learn from the process.

 

[Roy]

I look at these flowers as the result of an interesting experiment. The flowers are valuable in the sense that we learn the influence of helenae with every step. Usually Paph helenae has a pretty dominant influence but in this case Paph fairreanum has contributed an equal share of traits.

Not every cross is an award quality project, but they are quite revealing in their results. The key is to learn from the process.

#1. Every seedling cross is an experiment. Though as I said, there has to be some clear thinking & research done before the cross is made. ie what influences each parent ( particularly with species ) has had in other crosses. If NEW species are being used then its an unknown factor, these 2 aren't.
#2. I don't believe anyone raised the Award potential issue though some experimental crosses have worked by accident but usually by good thinking.
Yes learning from the process is the key but we are offered these plants more and more but the buyer isn't learning and saying, hang-on, these colors or these parents have extreme dominance (eg henryanum ) what have they done in previous crossings, are these 2 parents going to enhance one or the other or both. The hybridist can do what they like but in the long run its the buyer who must educate themselves as to the potentialof the cross in influences of the parents and there is plenty of information available.