Paph. coccineum

[Chien]

Just open.

Full open.

The leaves of this plant are very hard and erecting up.
I'll use this one to cross my another coccineum 'Blood Diamand'

 

[Chien]

Here are another two plants.
I don't know if these two are coccineum or lockianum. The leaves of these two plants are more soft. The petals of these two plants are not as thick as the first one flower. The shape of the pouch on these two plants are also different with the first one. These two plants are more like barbigerum, I would think they are barbigerum var. lockianum.

 

[NYEric]

I like the top flowers. [And that's a lot as I'm a Parvi fan mostly. :wink: ] Are these available in the USA or CITES interfered with!? OOPS! THanx for posting.

 

[goldenrose]

:drool: I just want to hug it right back!
Awesome cross of the two!

 

[Rick]

I'm not surprised there are some differences in leaf types from one plant to the next, but I thought that cocineum and var lockianum are the same thing, just fights between taxonomists about who got there first.

Your flowers have great color. Especially Blood Diamond:clap::clap:

 

[Hien]

Very beautiful, I think the flowers look like they belong to the same group.

 

[P-chan]

The first 2 photos are so sweet, with the frosty halo on the dorsal...I love it!

 

[SlipperFan]

The "full open" photo is very lovely.

 

[Bob in Albany N.Y.]

Very, nice. I've never seen those ones before. Looks like a good cross to me.

 

[Eric Muehlbauer]

Great blooms! Yes, unless somebody in the taxonomy world has changed opinions, coccineum and barbigerum v. lockianum are synonyms. I read somewhere that Averyanov or somebody agreed that lockianum wasn't valid...but I don't know if that means that coccineum is any more accepted.....Take care, Eric

 

[Greenpaph]

Thanks for sharing!

 

[Rick]

Great blooms! Yes, unless somebody in the taxonomy world has changed opinions, coccineum and barbigerum v. lockianum are synonyms. I read somewhere that Averyanov or somebody agreed that lockianum wasn't valid...but I don't know if that means that coccineum is any more accepted.....Take care, Eric

I also heard that by retaining varietal status it was easier to get around CITES since species like barbigerum and adductum were still legal species, and coccineum and anitum would be new species and hence "illegal".

 

[John M]

VERY nice! I love them all!

 

[jblanford]

Chien!!! Those flowers and pictures are just awesome. Thanks. Jim

 

[GuRu]

Great blooms! Yes, unless somebody in the taxonomy world has changed opinions, coccineum and barbigerum v. lockianum are synonyms. I read somewhere that Averyanov or somebody agreed that lockianum wasn't valid...but I don't know if that means that coccineum is any more accepted.....Take care, Eric

According to Koopowitz (Tropical Slipper Orchids page 136) the name P. barbigerum var. lockianum is now invalid. He considers it as a distinct species and therefore P. coccineum or P. barbigerum var. coccineum should be the right names.
Perhaps Olaf as an taxonomist is able to give the latest information about this.
The differences between the plant in the first photo and the two others are within the variability of this species. All photos show beautiful P. coccineum - at least in my eyes.
Best regards from Germany, rudolf

 

[SlipperKing]

Chien,
Make the crosses and send flasks this way!

 

[Roy]

For my 2 cents worth, the major difference between the two is the pouch. The first one is very wide at the top giving the pouch a "V" shape whereas the second post paph pics are more normal tight style of a paph. I would have thought this variation is not normal if the two where the same species, please tell me if my thinking is wrong. Even the pic of 'Blood Diamond' is closer to the second post pic paphs.

 

[goldenrose]

For my 2 cents worth, the major difference between the two is the pouch. The first one is very wide at the top giving the pouch a "V" shape whereas the second post paph pics are more normal tight style of a paph. I would have thought this variation is not normal if the two where the same species, please tell me if my thinking is wrong. Even the pic of 'Blood Diamond' is closer to the second post pic paphs.

Hmmm...... my eyes aren't seeing it that way. I'm finding it hard to compare pouch shape due to the angle that the different photos were taken. It might be me but I find all of the pouches to be somewhat V shaped.

 

[bench72]

I don't see much difference either apart from the angles the photos are taken...

it would be really good if there was a standard 'angle' that Paph photos are taken, ie say front on with half the staminoode is showing.... course, this is for ID purposes as oppose to when we want to go "oooh.. aaah".

 

[GuRu]

...the major difference between the two is the pouch. The first one is very wide at the top giving the pouch a "V" shape whereas the second post paph pics are more normal tight style of a paph. I would have thought this variation is not normal if the two where the same species, please tell me if my thinking is wrong....

I second what goldenrose and bench 72 stated already before. The angle of view differs between the three photos and particularly shapes should be assessed only in the same angle of view. I'm fairly sure only the more V shape of it's pouch isn't enough to separate it as variety or new species. If I'm not wrong at least three prominent differences are necessary to describe a new species.
Best regards from Germany, rudolf