Phal bellina x Phal violacea indigo blue

[Gardening in WM]

I also believe there should be more distinctions otherwise you end up with this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wpqSvrjZsrU

[Roberta]

I don't know what sort of distinctions you are proposing. It's really pretty straightforward - a cultivar represents a specific individual. Unlike humans or animals, it is possible for a genetic duplicate of a plant (orchid or otherwise) to exist - by division or cloning. But the cultivar name represents the unique genetics of the original. Any other form of reproduction produces individuals that are not identical.

[tmoney]

Originally Posted by Gardening in WM

I also believe there should be more distinctions otherwise you end up with this

ahahahah...hadnt seen that one, but that's a pretty funny ad...

[Roberta]

Originally Posted by tmoney

ahahahah...hadnt seen that one, but that's a pretty funny ad...

Not sure how it is relevant, however. :

[Gardening in WM]

Originally Posted by Roberta

Not sure how it is relevant, however. :

you buy a phal samera and expect it to look like the cross you see online and you end up with a completely different color and shape?

It makes a difference if you cross a phal belllina with a phal violacea vs a phal violacea crossed with a bellina yet the name is the same.

I magine you buy a ferrari and you end up getting sold what the ad made?

Relevant.

[Roberta]

If you purchase a specific cultivar, it should look like the picture... it is a clone. With any seed cross, there will be variation, even very substantial variation, because that is the nature of genetics. You and your brother may have the same parents, but you don't look alike unless you are identical twins (and therefore genetically identical or nearly so) And in addition, the parents of a seed cross of the same hybrids, or species, may be different plants and so look different. More like cousins than siblings, likely not like twins. Again, if you want a high level of predictability, buy a mericlone of a named cultivar. That is why the cultivar epithet is important, it says "this specific plant". There still can be some variation, mutations happen. It is a living organism, not a manufactured item. But a clone will be very close to the original.

[Louis_W]

What it boils down to is knowing what to expect.

Here is what yoy can expect if you buy this:

Phalaenopsis Samera 'Bredren's Blue Heaven' - this is a exact copy of what you can see if you look up the award. If the seller shows a picture, the plant you are buying is the exact same plant. If it is not VERY similar (culture can affect things) then you received the wrong plant.

Phal. Samara coerulea- this plant is a "blue" variety but it is no specific individual plant. The plant you bought should be bluish but the photo may not be the specific plant you are buying. If it is not bluish, you receoved the wrong plant.

Phalaenopsis violacea 'Bredren's Midnight Blue' x Phalaenopsis bellina 'Blue Ribbon- two award-winning coerulea parents when bred together give you a potentially great Phal Samara but thats all you know. It likely wont even be coerulea. Its a crapshoot but its good pedigree.

[Roberta]

A further note on the third option... if the coerulea coloration is recessive (probably is) then the odds are good that the cross won't be coerulea. However, the resultant plants with good pedigree and desirable characteristics are likely to be used for further hybridizing, when the coerulea characteristic may surface. That is the hybridizer's art - to see beyond the current plants to the possibilities in future crosses, additional generations down the road.

[tmoney]

Originally Posted by Roberta

Not sure how it is relevant, however. :

i know, sorry roberta! i wil try to keep things on topic!

[MateoinLosAngeles]

I haven't found a conclusive study or article explaining the differences between making (in this case) one species the seed parent vs. making it the pollen parent. I'm not even sure that can be traced back in the DNA.

So if there was a classification that made it mandatory to change grex depending on whether the parents are seed or pollen and we ended up having to make a distinction between Phal Samera and Phal Somero, given this is a primary hybrid that happens in nature where it's impossible (as far as I know) to know whether violacea or bellina were the seed parents, would we need a third name for those "found in nature?" So then if human pollinated the plant you call it Phal Samera or Phal Somero, but if insect pollinated in nature you call it Phal Semere? I just don't see the point or how this offers any value whatsoever based on available knowledge...

Unless I'm completely wrong and we're completely able to tell apart a hybrid based on whether a parent was seed or pollen... beyond speculation. Most hybridizers use the distinction "usually" as in "when this plant acts as the seed parent, we usually get more floriferous plants." I don't see how that could warrant a distinction. I don't know. I don't think botanical nomenclature is about making things more complicated than they need to be for no underlying reason or attempting to be so specific as to become so rigid as to not be able to keep up with advances in our knowledge.