Phragmipedium exstaminodium

Hi Leo, you can say 12 plants now, and more progeny...

 

Regarding Phrag. exstaminodium.....

Dear Leo and Rick:

Here's the story: In 2003, ORCHIDbabies bought all the Phrags and Paphs in the Fred and Mary Kaufman's greenhouse. Included were seedlings marked "wallisii." These seedlings originated from a flask from Paphanatics. They were raised as wallisii until they bloomed, and it was obvious they were exstaminodiums. Photos were sent to Harold Koopowitz, who identified the plant. One was sold to Marilyn at the Memphis show (probably in 2004), who later received an AM/AOS on this exstaminodium. At the same show, the ORCHIDbabies Phrag. exstaminodium 'Gandalf' had bloom damage and was not awarded. A year later it was awarded a CHM/AOS and Phrag exstaminodium 'Woton' was awarded an AM/AOS. Selfings from both these plants have been made. Additionally, Orchids Limited has one of these flasks, so that the gene pool is extended even further. Both of you were right - I agree that Marilyn is one of the very best Phrag growers in the US. There are only a few growers in the US that can grow such beautiful popowiis. We are still trying to catch up to Marilyn!:clap:

 

paph extaminodium

Ok - this is a great debate - Heres the - point -Earl Baliey grew these babies on from a flsk from Koopowitz and Hasegawa - then he bloomed them and got them awarded as such - as his supplier - If you don't trust - an AOS Judge then we have a big problem - You can't come along 2 years later and say everyone awarded a wrong species - as such - Earl shows pictures of Exstamino - - Let it go - declare a seperate species and get it awarded - untill then be glad someone has plants available -J

 

Very cool!!

Any speculation where Paphinatics got there breeding stock from?

 

Rick: It was a great accident! Earl thinks he remembers that someone said that they had the same "problem" in Australia! We have no idea of any further history of the original source of the exstaminodium, than what I typed before. See article by Dressler in the Orchid Digest a few years ago - they are all from one small locale in Mexico.

 

Thanks Phyllis. It's also great to hear from you again too this holiday season.

We have had many debates on this forum about taxonomy, with the debate usually started by:

"It looks like a hybrid".

From there it usually drifts into questions of what is normal variation for the species, and problems with source documentation.

Not to pick on you, but this thread demonstrates both of these points fairly well for the orchid world in general.

It kind of supports Birk's (or John Mickel's) view that once plants are removed from the wild you might as well ditch the concept of what a true species is, and just enjoy the flowers for what they are.

 

Exstaminodium

Great Rick - I enjoy any blooming and we are lucky to have suppliers like Earl and Alice - Thats the whole point -Once they are gone - they are gone - j

 

Nooooooo! :sob:

 

Interesting point, I did bring back that thread to talk about exstaminodium to clarify some of my interrogations. My goal was to get some more information about that specie from this forum’s growers who got that specie in cultivation and to compare their experiences and results with mine. Not to pick on anybody! Unfortunately the only way we get some more information about those plants descriptions it is when they are getting awards.
The second point was than I wanted to see more photos, especially close up...etc...

Now it becomes more like a religion, and we are talking about, trusting mislabelled flask, trusting AOS judges, trusting and not picking suppliers and to not asking question about species when they are not coming directly from the wild....? Sorry!

As a biologist, I do understand the principle than Rick is referring, but for me it doesn’t mean than we shall accept everything without any questions. Taxonomy is not a game it is a science for references. And if a description doesn’t fit the scientific references I will have the right to say why and ask some more questions...

I’m glad! I did receive an Email yesterday with this drawing from the original description of exstaminodium from Castrano, Hagsater y Aguirre in 1980, and I’m very please to finally see something resembling and matching exactly to my photos and my plant description.

 

Good for you, Jean-Pierre!

 

I agree with you (as a fellow biologist), and because this is text and not conversation you probably cannot tell the subtle note of frustration in my last post for the same reasons as you gave. Given the lack of known material for this plant I was hoping to track back from the very limited (with apparent variations) awarded captive F1's back to directly to their wild origin. And once again the documentation chain was broken. So now all we have is the chain of trust as you describe, and not much science.

One other thing to keep in mind though, is that Koopowitz was involved with Paphinatics for some time, and his taxonomic endorsement of the ID of the Orchid Babies plants may have more to it than just a simple ID comparison to the literature description (i.e. he may be aware of the original parent stock).

 

Phrag exstaminodium ?

This is funny - Rick and Jean - If you look in phrags in Jay Pfal's - Internet Orchid Specied Photo Encyclopedia - Under Extamin. you get a picture of a very green phrag - like your pics of popowii ---- then when you look up popo. you see a group of " awarded " phrags tan and bronze much like your pictures of extamin. --- Go figure -j.

 

You are absolutely right; text and conversation are something else, especially when you try to understand or explain clearly your point of view with a second language. In a live discussion I can see faces and eyes expressions and people ask you if it is what you really mean. I did felt some frustration in your last post, but I got it like we have to surrender, to give it up because we will never get any answers... And it may be right... I should write to him directly now... Thanks!

 

Nice pictures John! But I never mention anything about colouration as a criterion? And the plants you ask me to look at it now are the one who lead me into all that wondering and suspicion... Sorry!
Have a kind and objective look at the previous photo and the drawing the way the petals projection are forming a shield over the pouch, the way they are falling each side of it, look at the dorsal and ventral length... Read the first description of the specie and compare it with popowii than with the awarded plants descriptions and photo. You’ll have fun!
If you don’t see how different they are, you are right, I’ll find it funny!

 

What is also interesting is that the exstaminodium picture is Orchid Babies "Gandolf". Which if you look at pictures of other bloomings of this flower (or see it in person) is a darker flower within the range of colors typical for popowii.

May be lighting or digital translation issues.

 

Phrag exstaminodium

and look again the picture has a date of 1984? - I dont belive Earl had this plant in 1984 -I'll just have to wait for my 2 awarded plant selfings bloom out - Jean - I will revisit the drawings -j

 

1984 is the date the species taxonomic description was published (see the drawing from Jean-Pierre's previous post). Orchidbabies Gandalf wasn't even a glimpse in his mother's eye in 1984. There should be a space or comma between the proper taxonomic name and the photo credit on Jay's site.

 

Ricks reply

Good - I learn everyday - I wish I had a green house - It was 41 on my patio this morning - and I'm trying to grow Phrags ???? -Ha -j - San Diego does have a winter

 

They are back!