paph species no 2 ???

[Heather]

Until someone crosses the two!

And here we go again!

 

[Roy]

Heather, there is no need to get concerned, its already been done by accident or intent long ago.

 

[Leo Schordje]

On the pod maturation times, I like working with fully ripe dry seed. A bit more inconvenient in handling, BUT - especially with NON-Paphs, a better way to end the virus transmission. With green pod there is always the risk of transmitting virus to the new seedlings. (especially Phals, Cymbidiums and Catts)

I have kept some notes, and it took my hirsustissimum 24 months to go to ripe dry seed. Paph tigrinum also takes 24 months to go to dry seed.

 

[Rick]

to get an 'uncorrupted' strain of a species of these plants would be a stroke of luck at best unless the hybridist has a wild collected plant that was selfed.

Why are we concerned with 'uncorrupted 'strains of species rather than understanding the normal variation of the species?

There would be no point in judging species if everything was a xerox copy of the original collected plant, and something inbred from continuous selfing has no value in the conservation arena. So you are left with a stamp collection with no practical value.

 

[biothanasis]

Harold Koopowitz says 15-18 months for hirsutissimum and 6-9 months for esquirolei.

David

Hello David!!! Welcome!

 

[Corbin]

Why are we concerned with 'uncorrupted 'strains of species rather than understanding the normal variation of the species?

There would be no point in judging species if everything was a xerox copy of the original collected plant, and something inbred from continuous selfing has no value in the conservation arena. So you are left with a stamp collection with no practical value.

I can think of a couple; If you start breeding for some particular
"improvement" and lose the original strain but then run into a dead end with the breeding you cannot get back to the beginning to try another approach. Conservation is about conserving both the diversity and the individual. Your argument seems to be let the polar bears and grizzly bears go the way of the dodo bird because we have plenty of other different kind of bears.

 

[Rick]

I can think of a couple; If you start breeding for some particular
"improvement" and lose the original strain but then run into a dead end with the breeding you cannot get back to the beginning to try another approach. Conservation is about conserving both the diversity and the individual. Your argument seems to be let the polar bears and grizzly bears go the way of the dodo bird because we have plenty of other different kind of bears.

We are debating strains or varieties not species, and it was not my contention that we should only breed within the strain (it was Roy's). However using the mammal example of conservation by trying to breed only within the strain, it has been demonstrated that the inbreeding depression either produces genetically crippled individuals, or a population that is incapable of adapting to changes or challenges from the environment. Subsequently, the xerox copies in captivity can only survive in a captive environment even if they do not become genetically crippled.

A recent example of this is the Florida panther which had lost so much of its population that it had effectively become self sterile. A handful of closely related female panthers from Texas (same species, different population (strain)) were introduced into Florida, and the population of panthers in Florida is now rebounding.

If we had been adhering to Roy's contention of keeping the strains "pure" the Florida strain would continue to spiral into extinction. It may be arguable that we now have illicit "hybrids" of two strains of panthers loose in Florida now, but we now have a growing healthy population of the panther species in Florida. From working in zoos, I am aware of several similar projects (including resurrecting of an extinct strain of Galapagos tortoise) that went through a similar strategy.

Going to a plant example, we can look at the work being done with the American Chestnut, which for the most part has been wiped out by a fungal blight. There is a program underway to breed the Chinese chestnut (resistant to blight) into what remains of the American Chestnut, and then breed back until the percentage of AC is high again, but still infer the blight resistance. I guess it is arguable that the new chestnut will not be a "true" American chestnut, but for many forest dwellers it will be close enough.

 

[Roy]

Rick, I think you miss quote me. What I was suggesting is that over the years, different similar looking species have been cross bred and this is the corruption of which I speak. The plants I quoted like P.tigrinum, to my knowledge, we don't have a multitude of varieties ex' the alba forum. Thus, initial selfings or outcrossing between different wild collected plants keeps the strain somewhat pure. The outcrossings should/will keep the strain as is but will & has created better forms of the species. The hirsutissimum x esquirolei situation I venture to say has been happening for years and this is why we are getting the variations in shape, color & hairs stem length etc we see. Basically, the more variations of one one particular species, the more the hybridist has to work with to modify the plant and flower yet maintaining the same name. To fit with your example of the Chestnut.

 

[Rick]

What I was suggesting is that over the years, different similar looking species have been cross bred and this is the corruption of which The hirsutissimum x esquirolei situation I venture to say has been happening for years and this is why we are getting the variations in shape, color & hairs stem length etc we see.

From day to day and person to person you could get a different answer as to whether hirsutissimum and esquirolei are different species, varieties, or just upland and lowland forms of the same species. At this time I wouldn't be convinced of any significant differences without the results of a good pollinator specificity study. But there are other species pairs that probably warrant more considerable debate.

 

[Corbin]

We are debating strains or varieties not species,

I realize that Rick I was just trying to make the point obvious. I agree that if you are just breeding from a single plant and continuously selfing it you are going to lose. That is why zoos that are trying to preserve a species are always trying to enlarge their breeding program by breeding with other animals that are known to have a different genetic background. But you can do the same thing with a "strain" so long as you do not limit yourself to a single plant and its offspring. Surly the definition of strain means more that a single plant and its offspring.

 

[SlipperKing]

Surly the definition of strain means more that a single plant and its offspring.

You are correct in your thinking Ed. A strain is more then one. A single plant with an unusal trait is called a "cultivar" or sometimes a "clone", as in, single clone.

 

[Rick]

I realize that Rick I was just trying to make the point obvious. I agree that if you are just breeding from a single plant and continuously selfing it you are going to lose. That is why zoos that are trying to preserve a species are always trying to enlarge their breeding program by breeding with other animals that are known to have a different genetic background. But you can do the same thing with a "strain" so long as you do not limit yourself to a single plant and its offspring. Surly the definition of strain means more that a single plant and its offspring.

That is true, but the reality of getting enough VERIFIABLE material from a single population that can be shared around and maintained over time really limits options, and record keeping appears to be worthless. The exact localities of much of the collected material is erroneous to fraudulent in many cases, and it appears that we keep trying to backtrack the collection local identity by visual ID of the flower, or saying its this variety or that variety based on physical appearance of a flower with little or no understanding of the natural phenotypic (or genotypic) variation of the species.

I worked on several SSP programs when I worked in zoos, so I can see the differences between what the orchid hobby does versus what is needed for a good conservation based breeding program. But in many ways the cat is not only out of the bag, but also dead and burried, since orchid species have been moving through breeders hands for a 100+ years now. That's a long time to screw up allot of records which is compounded by frequent taxonomic reclassification of the known species too.