P. intaniae

[adiaphane]

I've never even heard about it! There's a picture here, with lots of other beautiful photos of other paphs as well, second one.

http://www.jardins-interieurs.com/orchidees/paphio.photos/paphio.liste2.html

 

[silence882]

From what I've read, it's thought to be an artificial hybrid between philippinense and parishii or dianthum that is posing as a newfound species.

--Stephen

 

[bench72]

the site is definitely a 'splitter'... eg Paph chiwuanum, Paph esquirolei, Paph hirsutissimum... and that is just one example... the appletonianum complex looks like it's been split up to.

and to top it all off.. there isn't even any philippinense

cheers

 

[Heather]

There was a good photo of this a while back on the Taiwanese site...that was the first I'd really heard of it.

 

[Rick]

Koopowitz gives it credability as a "good species" in the Orchid Digest paph checklist (2000).

Its listed in Birk's second revised edition (2004) with local data. Central Sulawesi

Not listed in Cribb's 2nd edition (1998)

 

[SlipperFan]

Nice flowers, whether species or hybrid. Someday they might get all this sorted out, but I'm not holding my breath.

 

[ORG]

Dear Stephen,
when you would have the possibility to see Paph. intaniae in bloom then you would accept this species as a distinct species. It is really very different to Paph. Umatilla the cross between parishii and philippinense.
The species was described 2000 by William Cavestro. The plants (more than 1000 identical) were found by Ayub Parnata or one of his collectors in Sulawesi.

Best greetings

Olaf

 

[silence882]

Olaf, thanks very much for the info! I don't think there are any legal plants here in the US, so I've seen 0 of them....

I was basing my info on the opinion of the orchid registrar at the RHS and that of Braem (Orchid Digest 2004). I found a photo through google of Umatilla and it looks way different from intaniae.

However, isn't Ayub Parnata notorious for introducing artificial hybrids as 'new' species? Is that the case with sugiyamanum and Jogjae-posing-as-species?

Please keep in mind all my info is based on reading the works of others! I don't get out nearly enough...

--Stephen

 

[adiaphane]

I have an idea that some of the Paphiopedilums that Ayub "finds" or "has",then there is something more to the story on the plant...

-PM

Que? I'm having a hard time following this sentence... please clarify.

 

[Mahon]

Rephrased (I am quite tired... sorry if I was unclear)

The validity of the Paph. species found by Ayub should be questioned... like Steve said, he may pass off hybrids as species... etc...

I don't want to get into details, but I recieved a Paph. hybrid instead of a Paph. species that I wanted. So I personally question Ayub's "new" species... I too heard of similar stories concerning Ayub.

-Pat

 

[littlefrog]

A friend of mine sent me some pictures of this, and it seems quite distinct from anything else I've seen. Kind of like a fuzzy stonei crossed with a roth. The flower segments (except for the pouch) and ovary are hirsute. I too am suspicious of many of the new species, and hate to make decisions based on pictures, but it looks pretty plausable to me. If it is a hybrid, it isn't one I've seen.

As of now, I'm pretty sure there have been no legal importations of intaniae into the USA. It isn't a blockbuster flower, although I suppose the collector who has to have one of each species would need one. I really can't see much point in breeding with it, but I suspect that won't stop anybody.