Paph. gardineri

[jblanford]

YES!! I agree with all that is a great looking bloom, thanks.... Jim.

 

[Rick]

It has 3 mature growths and a new one just starting. One growth has bloomed before, but the 2nd growth has yet to bloom. Strange.

The largest leaf measures 7.5 inches (19.05 cm) in length.

That's towards the larger end of what can be expected for wilhelminea. I have a couple of them that have entire leaf spans under 7.5 inches. Also the staminode and pouch are a bit different than yours.

The lowland glanduliferum version of this complex is bigger, and more often than not will have 3-4 flowers per spike. And over the years there's been a lot of crossing of big and small plants so now there probably are a lot of integrades around. (same for hirsutisimum and var. esquirolei).

If future bloomings stay with the 2-3 flower count I'd probably stick with wilhelm, if it starts producing higher flower counts I'd switch to glanduliferum.

 

[Bolero]

That's a great flowering, I haven't seen any of these at shows.

THanks for sharing.

 

[SlipperFan]

That's towards the larger end of what can be expected for wilhelminea. I have a couple of them that have entire leaf spans under 7.5 inches. Also the staminode and pouch are a bit different than yours.

The lowland glanduliferum version of this complex is bigger, and more often than not will have 3-4 flowers per spike. And over the years there's been a lot of crossing of big and small plants so now there probably are a lot of integrades around. (same for hirsutisimum and var. esquirolei).

If future bloomings stay with the 2-3 flower count I'd probably stick with wilhelm, if it starts producing higher flower counts I'd switch to glanduliferum.

Thanks, Rick. Most of the leaves are quite a bit under 7.5", but the one is that, so I thought that should be the norm. So far, both bloomings have had only two flowers. I'll make a note of your comment on my "list."

 

[etex]

I want one! What a glorious, dignified flower!! I am in awe.

 

[tenman]

Ain't no such thing as glanduliferum, at least not in cultvation - no stripes in glanduliferum. It's a lost species.

 

[Rick]

Ain't no such thing as glanduliferum, at least not in cultvation - no stripes in glanduliferum. It's a lost species.

I don't think this is too dated. http://www.ladyslipper.com/ppgland.htm

IMO the work by Garay is bogus since his analysis is based on either single dated herbarium specimens of dubious local data. Or single living mutant specimens with no population data. Also it's primarily a book keeping exercise. Apparently the type specimen of glanduliferum (without stripes) hasn't been seen outside of the museum since 1848.

According to J Levey and L Garay, there are no true wilhelminea in cultivation in the US (they are all gardenarii in their opinion, as the only true wilhem, has completely untwisted petals and there only seems to be one plant like this in existence in the world). That does not make a species, just a stray mutant, and it wouldn't be the first time that a taxonomic description was based on an aberrant bloom.

I realize that Koopowitz at one point (and maybe presently) reversed his position on the subject. However, what that leaves within New Guinea and surrounding islands is an extremely variable P. gardnerii with small highland forms labeled as wilhelminae, and large lowland forms (with stripes) can default to plain old gardnerii to make the historians happy or glanduliferum (or praetans) to make the culturists happy .

 

[tenman]

Unfortunately, in taxonomy, it's the original description which must rule. And here is a quote from Koopowitz's second OD checklist(2000):

But I am now swayed by Braem, Baker and Baker (1999), Garay (1995), and Christenson (personal communication) that P.glanduliferum is a New Gunea species with a non-striped flower and a very different staminode that separates it from P.praestans.

...


Perhaps new discoveries in New Guinea will eventually reveal the true P.glanduliferum. For the moment this must be considered a "lost" species.

A plant one would like to call glanduliferum must be called something else if it doesn't match the original description. If the original description was based on an aberrant plant, still plants which do not match that must be given a different name as described by their own characteristics elsewhere, but only plants which match the original description may carry that name. Praestans, wilhelminae and gardineri do not match that description.

As for the RHS registering plant parents as glanduliferum, the RHS registration has never been a taxonomic authority, but rather more of a taxonomic nightmare.

 

[SlipperKing]

To me, it looks like a hybrid between the two, wilhelminiae and praestans

 

[Rick]

To me, it looks like a hybrid between the two, wilhelminiae and praestans

Yup, but I don't think its been established that there is any distinct separation between upland and lowland populations in the New Guinea wilhelm/gardneri/praestans complex to preclude this is a natural intermediate form.

There is a eco-phenomenon called clinal variation that can produce distinct, but incremental populational differences within a species as one moves from one end of a climate extreme to another.

This is a fairly common phenomena noted for plants as you see the expression of small local populations along an altitude continueum.

 

[Bolero]

Ah I've come across a flask of these for sale, I didn't realise it was a multifloral. I guess I won't be ordering one although judging by your photo I wish I could grow them.