But I'm wondering why you named this thread 'Paph superbiens v. curtisii'? Because neither flower nor tag show any hints of v. curtisii.
Your plant is really a true Paphiopedilum curtisii. Some years ago the true Paph. superbiens was found again and this Shows the clear differences to curtisii. Her eat first two different clones of curtisii
View attachment 16835
Paphiopedilum curtisii
and now the true superbiens View attachment 16836 Paphiopedilum superbiens
Here an old print of the typical Paph. superbiens
View attachment 16837
Best greetings
Olaf
I've never before been able to make head nor tail of all the conflicting and mutually contradictory descriptions of superbiens vs curtisii, but the difference is now clear as crystal - and also the fact, that plants that for decades have passed as superbiens actually have been curtisii!
The link to the photo of Olaf shows only two different curtisii.
Enter your email address to join: