Paph. papuanum

[Martin]

Would like to show some Paph. papuanum. The first plant i got as P. violascens, the others as papuanum. Love this species, very nice colored!


Paphiopedilum papuanum von epicphals auf Flickr


Paphiopedilum papuanum von epicphals auf Flickr


Paphiopedilum papuanum von epicphals auf Flickr


Paphiopedilum papuanum von epicphals auf Flickr


Paphiopedilum papuanum von epicphals auf Flickr


Paphiopedilum papuanum von epicphals auf Flickr


Paphiopedilum papuanum von epicphals auf Flickr


Paphiopedilum papuanum von epicphals auf Flickr


Paphiopedilum papuanum von epicphals auf Flickr

 

[likespaphs]

i like them very much!

 

[wolverine329]

This is lovely

 

[eggshells]

Can I have it? Just kidding very nice. Looking at you plant my violasccens looks like its still a year and a half from blooming.

 

[W. Beetus]

Wow! The first one looks great!

 

[tomkalina]

Based on the tessellated leaves, flower color and general flower morphology, they all look like straight violascens to me, not papuanum. Maybe Olaf (ORG) can chime in on this?

 

[SlipperFan]

They do pretty much look the same -- I'll take any one of them!

 

[Eric Muehlbauer]

these look like the classic "papuanum".....which is really violascens. But I must say, they are gorgeous violascens...much better than the "papuanum" I had years ago.

 

[Stone]

Wow!!!!!! that first plant is just stunning!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[GuRu]

Based on the tessellated leaves, flower color and general flower morphology, they all look like straight violascens to me, not papuanum. Maybe Olaf (ORG) can chime in on this?

Indeed, both are very nice P. violascens, nothing more and nothing less.

 

[NYEric]

There are 4 different flowers, right? I'm not a species person but the first has nice colors and the third has intersting shape. thanks for sharing.

 

[Martin]

Thanks for your interest and comments!

Can I have it?

No! :wink:

these look like the classic "papuanum".....which is really violascens. But I must say, they are gorgeous violascens...much better than the "papuanum" I had years ago.

Thanks for your correction. I am still not so familiar with this section. I will change the names on my flickr.

There are 4 different flowers, right? I'm not a species person but the first has nice colors and the third has intersting shape. thanks for sharing.

yes, 4 different plants! First one is also my favorite! They are more which haven't flowered, yet. I will continue, when they will bloom...

 

[SlipperKing]

I agree with the others Martin, beautiful! and all are P. violascens

 

[Rick]

I agree with the others Martin, beautiful! and all are P. violascens

There is a thread with pictures on papuanum. I actually got referred back to it from a regular Google searchoke:

 

[emydura]

Just stunning. Well done on growing these so well.

 

[ORG]

Also when my nswer is a very late, all the shown pictures show Paph. violascens.
Here some pictures of the true Paph. papuanum with the typical staminode.

Best greetings

Olaf

 

[Rick]

Yes that is a totally different flower compared to Martin's violascians (which are about the best colored ones I've ever seen).

Is the reason violascians (nomenclature) is confused with papuanum because they both come from Papua NG?

Is anyone growing papuanum in the US?

 

[ORG]

The confusing was the result of the lacking of Paph. papuanum in the collections. So we had not enough informations about these species from New Guinea.
In the last 10 years sometimes plants of this species came in culture, especially in Europe and Asia.

Best greetings

Olaf

 

[Eric Muehlbauer]

In the 1980's there was a resurgence in paph species exports...a lot of major plants were discovered then, like armeniacum, malipoense, henryanum, and emersonii, along with the rediscovery of sanderianum and the emergence of micranthum, barbigerum, and dianthum. Lots of stuff was imported then...legally, as it was pre-CITES. In the excitement, papuanum, always an enigmatic species, got mixed up with violascens. Virtually all importations of "papuanum" at that time, turned out to be violascens. One of the best reference books then, Bennett's book, couldn't even come up with a picture of papuanum, which was also confused with "zieckianum". So, given all the historical confusion, its a miracle that there are any true papuanum's out there.

 

[SlipperFan]

I'd love to have one of each species!