Paphiopedilum charlesworthii

Slippertalk Orchid Forum

Help Support Slippertalk Orchid Forum:

Rick Barry

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2006
Messages
191
Reaction score
0
Here's a first-bloom seedling of Paph charlesworthii.
Not especially large, but nice color and wide petals.



Regards,
Rick
 
G

goldenrose

Guest
Love the color! Love the species!
What do you consider small? (Seeing we have nothing for comparison)
 

paphreek

Vendor
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
4,384
Reaction score
2
Location
North central Minnesota
It is very nicely colored, Rick. This one is definitely worth growing to larger size. On two charlesworthii's that I've grown from flask, the second blooming has been substantially larger than the first. Even the shape was better.
 
Joined
Jun 8, 2006
Messages
901
Reaction score
0
Location
San Diego, CA Zone 11a
Nice!

I'm eying mine in suspense--first blooming as well. It's from Orchid Inn, so I know it's going to be golden...provided it hasn't felt neglected in my care.
 
L

lothianjavert

Guest
Lovely!! Grow it up a bit before you decide, sometimes the blooming on a more mature plant is a lot better: shape AND size! I really like the color and wide petals!

I definitely need to add this species to my collection.
 

Lance Birk

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2006
Messages
182
Reaction score
1
Rick,

That's a very nice flower, unfortunately it is not P. charlesworthii but a hybrid. The species carries inflexed petals, not reflexed. The base of the dorsal sepal is much too wide, as is the ventral, and I've not seen such webbing on any P. charlesworthii. A slight possibility does exist that this could be bred from highly selected clones, but I seriously doubt it. I'd check with your source to see what you can learn.
 

slippertalker

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2006
Messages
962
Reaction score
0
Location
Seattle, Wa.
Plants such as this have been selectively bred for several generations. What Lance mentions regarding the typical Paph charlesworthii is true, but these plants have been bred to be richer in color with wider segments over time. They, as a result, do vary from the original wild collected plants. I do find the reflexing of the petals to be a question with this plant, even with the typical "modern" Paph charlesworthii, I haven't seen this before. Perhaps a couple of flatter than normal plants were crossed to achieve this trait.

The broad dorsal and ventral are pretty typical of selective breeding with this species.
 

Rick Barry

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2006
Messages
191
Reaction score
0
Rick,

That's a very nice flower, unfortunately it is not P. charlesworthii but a hybrid. The species carries inflexed petals, not reflexed. The base of the dorsal sepal is much too wide, as is the ventral, and I've not seen such webbing on any P. charlesworthii. A slight possibility does exist that this could be bred from highly selected clones, but I seriously doubt it. I'd check with your source to see what you can learn.
Lance,

Honestly, I'm not inclined to question the breeder of this plant, and considering the source of the plant I doubt if you would either. I do have a few responses to the evidence you present in supporting your claim.

The photo was taken at the earliest moment after the flower was fully opened. The petals did indeed inflex over time, but if I were to have it judged I would certainly prefer that it be judged as you saw it.

In the line breeding of P. charlesworthii, the most desirable improvements would be the widening of floral segments, intensification of color (especially in the dorsal) and minimized (or even elimination) of the inflexing of the petals. It should come as no surprise that breeders have experienced some success along these lines.

Your comment regarding the patterning on the petals is really puzzling. Many photos (in books as well as online) of reputed charlesworthii's exhibit this same patterning. Catherine Cash even describes the patterning on the petals as "reticulated".

I've seen a few hybrids with charlesworthii, and its influence is often pronounced, but I've never seen any that could pass as the species itself. What sort of combination do you suppose would produce what would appear to many as a dead ringer for Paph charlesworthii?

I'm not looking for any heated debate here (and I will consult with some other Paph growers), but I think your judgement was a little hasty.

Regards,
Rick
 
M

Mrs. Paph

Guest
Yeah, I don't see anything other than a nice clone of the species there. I wouldn't question the ID.
 

Lance Birk

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2006
Messages
182
Reaction score
1
Thanks for your comments, Rick.

The identity of your plant still bothers me. I myself, would rather know the history of its existence and I would want to ask the vendor for a complete history of his source. By your comment, I trust that he is a reliable vendor, however, with such a rampant plethora of mis-information these days, in all good conscience, I would need solid evidence to justify the proper identity of any 'species.'

I'm quite familiar with this species and I fully realize the possibilities for its selective breeding, however, I do not believe in the likelihood of it having the inherent characteristic of inflexed petals being bred out of it in only 3, to possibly 5 generations of breeding. Petals of P. charlesworthii do not open reflexed, and then become inflexed.

The size of the dorsal sepal is understandable, however the fact that it appears in your photo that there is no visible constriction at the base might be explained by the angle of view. The size of the ventral sepal is suspiciously large, and it normally takes numerous generations of careful selection to achieve this aspect. Still, is is a possibility with your plant.

My comments about the webbing in the petals is perhaps mis-construed. I am simply surprised to see such intensity. I like it; but it's very pronounced. The deep colors of your flower are quite striking.

I could not hazard a guess as to what, exactly, constitutes the heritage of your plant.....we ALWAYS guess wrong in this exercise. And you are correct in stating that this species is very dominant in just about every aspect of its characteristics. As you know, there always exists the possibility of 'stray genes' inhabiting plants that are selected for appearance. This probability is compounded over time and by plant exchanges.

We face some serious challenges these days, not only because of the restrictions caused by CITES, but by the rampant mis-information propagated on the Internet. It pays to be cautious........I think.

Lance Birk
 
Top