J
Help Support Slippertalk Orchid Forum:
E
Elena
Guest
Lovely! One of my favourite Phrag hybrids.
G
Greenpaph
Guest
Super nice coloration!
:clap::clap:
:clap::clap:
G
Grandma M
Guest
That one is fantastic. I love the deep color. I have 2, 'Clyde' and 'Monroe', they both are very faithful bloomers. One is in bloom now and the other has buds forming. Do you know the clonal name of yours? I would like to get one with the darker color like yours, if I can find one.
Marilyn
Marilyn
Yoyo_Jo
Catt's Meow
Wow, the deep color is amazing. Well done! :clap:
G
Greenorchid
Guest
Really a deep colour!!! That's a wonderful Schroderae 
John M
Orchid Addict
John;
That's really, really gorgeous; but, I don't think it's Schroederae. Schroederae is 1/2 caudatum, 1/4 schlimii and 1/4 longifolium. There is nothing in the background of Schroederae to make it so red. This looks suspiciously like a besseae or Mem. Dick Clements cross. Perhaps it could be Beaumont crossed back onto caudatum? Schroederae is pink. I've never heard of, or seen a red one. The colour of Schroederae comes from the Sedenii parent and even a very dark Sedenii is a dark pink, never red. Are you able to track the origin of this plant? It would be helpful. As well as the colour difference, I'd expect Schroederae to have slightly longer and more directly downward hanging petals.
This is the sort of awesome Phrag that Chuck Acker likes to produce. Perhaps it originated at his nursery? Even if not, he may be able to give you a more expert opinion about the probable parentage of this plant. It would be nice to get that figured out, if possible.
Thanks for posting. This is one that I'd love to have in my collection! I love the intense colour!
That's really, really gorgeous; but, I don't think it's Schroederae. Schroederae is 1/2 caudatum, 1/4 schlimii and 1/4 longifolium. There is nothing in the background of Schroederae to make it so red. This looks suspiciously like a besseae or Mem. Dick Clements cross. Perhaps it could be Beaumont crossed back onto caudatum? Schroederae is pink. I've never heard of, or seen a red one. The colour of Schroederae comes from the Sedenii parent and even a very dark Sedenii is a dark pink, never red. Are you able to track the origin of this plant? It would be helpful. As well as the colour difference, I'd expect Schroederae to have slightly longer and more directly downward hanging petals.
This is the sort of awesome Phrag that Chuck Acker likes to produce. Perhaps it originated at his nursery? Even if not, he may be able to give you a more expert opinion about the probable parentage of this plant. It would be nice to get that figured out, if possible.
Thanks for posting. This is one that I'd love to have in my collection! I love the intense colour!
SlipperFan
Addicted
Whatever it is, it has great color.
NYEric
Well-Known Member
Good color. Probably a Schroderae made w/ a nice dark longifolium. Definitely w/in the bounds of a Schroderae though.
John M
Orchid Addict
I wonder what Olaf thinks......?
P
Park Bear
Guest
love the color!!
NYEric
Well-Known Member
Check phragweb.
John M
Orchid Addict
"Check phragweb."
'Not quite sure to what benefit? The photos on Phragweb support my point. This flower is way too red and not quite the right shape. I may be wrong of course. I'd be an egomaniac to never allow myself to be open to the idea of being wrong.....and therefore, rob myself of an opportunity to learn something. After all, I haven't seen the flower in person; just a two dimensional photo. Sometimes that makes a difference on one's opinion. However, I think that my comments bring up some very good points to consider. When forced to choose whether or not that is 1) 100% definitely a Schroederae, or 2) very possibly something else, including genes from either/or besseae - sargentianum, I'll still pick option #2. IMHO, there is no genetic basis for that uniform, rich red colour.
'Not quite sure to what benefit? The photos on Phragweb support my point. This flower is way too red and not quite the right shape. I may be wrong of course. I'd be an egomaniac to never allow myself to be open to the idea of being wrong.....and therefore, rob myself of an opportunity to learn something. After all, I haven't seen the flower in person; just a two dimensional photo. Sometimes that makes a difference on one's opinion. However, I think that my comments bring up some very good points to consider. When forced to choose whether or not that is 1) 100% definitely a Schroederae, or 2) very possibly something else, including genes from either/or besseae - sargentianum, I'll still pick option #2. IMHO, there is no genetic basis for that uniform, rich red colour.
NYEric
Well-Known Member
The 3rd and 4th photos on Phragweb [by Roberto Takase and Tennis Maynard respectively] are about as rich colored; just not as brightly lit.
John M
Orchid Addict
I agree. They are Schroederae. They are deep pink, not red. Also, they have the a correctly shaped staminode. The flower in this thread does not. It is more rounded than it should be. Also, the two photos on Phragweb show a slight remnant of a horm on either side of the pouch, the one in this thread does not. The spotted area on the back of the inside opening of the pouch on both the Phragweb photos is complete and touching, all the way up and behind the staminode. The flower in this thread's photo is not. Also, very notably, in the Phragweb photos, the dorsal sepal and synsepal are not richly coloured, as is expected with Schroederae. The flower in this thread's photo has wonderful rich red colour on both the dorsal sepal and synsepal.
In your original post, where you disagree with me, you say: "Definitely w/in the bounds of a Schroderae though." I strongly disagree with that statement. If this flower is a true Schroederae, it is a very exceptional one; not one that a person would expect to see.....not as "normal" or "average" as you seem to be arguing.
Eric, I'm not trying to be a pain for you. I'm not wanting a fight or to argue; but, you did contradict me and I'm just defending my viewpoint now. I've said all that I can. People can agree or not....or, they can at least wonder about the validity of the name. I don't care. I was just commenting from the point of view of someone who is experienced and feels that he knows something about this. If you still disagree, then, we'll have to just leave it at that. Hopefully, you don't have any hard feelings because I don't accept your opposition to my opinion.
In your original post, where you disagree with me, you say: "Definitely w/in the bounds of a Schroderae though." I strongly disagree with that statement. If this flower is a true Schroederae, it is a very exceptional one; not one that a person would expect to see.....not as "normal" or "average" as you seem to be arguing.
Eric, I'm not trying to be a pain for you. I'm not wanting a fight or to argue; but, you did contradict me and I'm just defending my viewpoint now. I've said all that I can. People can agree or not....or, they can at least wonder about the validity of the name. I don't care. I was just commenting from the point of view of someone who is experienced and feels that he knows something about this. If you still disagree, then, we'll have to just leave it at that. Hopefully, you don't have any hard feelings because I don't accept your opposition to my opinion.
NYEric
Well-Known Member
Ummm, they're just plants. There is no way, beyond genetic testing, that one can know exactly what it is. If it is a Schroederae it has value for the reasons you mention. I still think it's within the degree of variability one can expect-IMO
