Laelia gouldiana extinct?

[gdupont]

Is Laelia gouldiana really extinct in the wild? I read that it was from one source, but haven't found it elsewhere

[Subrosa]

Extinct is extinct. If there are none left in the wild, but they continue to exist they're considered extirpated.

[estación seca]

I did some digging, because I bought this from Andy's last December and mounted it on the jacaranda tree in front of my mom's house in southern Orange County, California.

From Status Survey and Conservation Action Plan: Orchids, Hagsater and Dumont, editors, IUCN. This can be found on Google Books.

https://books.google.com/books?id=9B...xtinct&f=false

"As far a we know, the only orchid that appears to be Extinct in the Wild in Mexico is Laelia gouldiana Rchb. f. This orchid has never been known in a wild state; all the specimens have been found growing on private property in the state of Hidalgo. The species is appreciated by the local people, who occasionally sell inflorescences and small pieces of plants to supplement their income."

There are quite a number of beautiful and useful plants in horticulture from México which have never been found in the wild. These were cultivated by Mexicans long before European contact. It is not certain whether they were wild species collected to extinction, or cultivars selected by ancient horticulturists. Other examples of these plants are most of the economically useful Agave species, and the bulb flower tuberose, which has previously been called Polianthes tuberosa.

After DNA work, the entire genus of Polianthes, together with sister genus Manfreda, have been transferred to Agave by taxonomists. The correct name for the tuberose is now Agave polianthes.

I might add... Almost every state in México has vast amounts of terrain unexplored by botanists. Who know whether Laelia gouldiana might not be discovered eventually in the wild? The Mexican Laelias are from mountainous country, which is usually very difficult to explore.

[dnatural1]

Originally Posted by estación seca

I did some digging, because I bought this from Andy's last December and mounted it on the jacaranda tree in front of my mom's house in southern Orange County, California.

......... etc

Hi, Estacion Seca
Appreciate your detailed answer. I also have a Laelia gouldiana but did not know it's status. Always believed it to be a species (which is what I collect). So if no one has ever located a specimen in the wild can the plant be labelled a species? My understanding is that for a plant to be labelled a species someone would have had to locate a specimen in the wild, collect it and lodge it in a herbarium as a reference for that species (once accepted to be a species).

[estación seca]

Originally Posted by dnatural1

Hi, Estacion Seca
Appreciate your detailed answer. I also have a Laelia gouldiana but did not know it's status. Always believed it to be a species (which is what I collect). So if no one has ever located a specimen in the wild can the plant be labelled a species? My understanding is that for a plant to be labelled a species someone would have had to locate a specimen in the wild, collect it and lodge it in a herbarium as a reference for that species (once accepted to be a species).

There are a few ways to look at the problem....

Nobody ever thought the plants were created, or evolved, in those people's gardens, so it would have been thought they had been wild-collected at some time in the past. But that's a conjecture. Maybe it is a hybrid originating in somebody's garden. Maybe DNA work could help sort it out at some time in the future, though there's not much money to make frm that sort of research, so it's low priority.

At one time giving a name required only publishing a name and description for the plant, and a reference to a plant, herbarium specimen or an image of the plant. Careful botanists published much more detailed information on new species, including type locality and a Latin description, but this was not required. Laelia gouldiana was published in the Gardeners' Chronicle in 1888. A lot of orchids were named this way during the Age of Exploration. Naming rules have changed.

Now the locality has to be given, a specimen must be deposited in a public herbarium, and a description must be published properly, including a Latin description of at least how this plant differs from a close relative. The purpose of the type specimen is so that other students may see exactly what the original namer meant.

Plants that were properly named under old rules are still considered to have been properly named. When the original plant material or herbarium specimen is gone, later taxonomists may assign a new type specimen and reaffirm the name. Sometimes the new type specimen is a drawing or print made of the plant near the time of the original naming, and sometimes the new type is a recently-collected herbarium specimen.

Plants known only in cultivation can be named as species. As mentioned earlier, loads of Agave species are known only from cultivation. Nowadays the person doing the naming would likely try and be pretty sure it's not a garden hybrid or selected form.

It might be that a lot of old Agave family species would not be considered species if discovered now, merely cultivars: They are only known from cultivation; many are clearly one large group of clones; and, some of them never set seed with pollen from the same species, though they can cross with other Agaves.

I wonder why there is regular Laelia gouldiana, and there is Laelia gouldiana 'Greta Garbo', which seems different from the others? People with both in their collections must have tried crossing them in the past. What happened?

After I wrote the above, I went looking to see whether I could find the original description. I did:

The Gardeners' Chronicle, Series 3, Volume 3, January 14, 1888, page 41

As you can read, Heinrich Gustav Reichenbach (the Reichenbach son, for his father was also a botanist) thought it might be a hybrid, and he made no mention whatsoever of where the plant came from. It was named after New York investment banker Jay Gould, who helped build the US railroad system.

[dnatural1]

So I am finishing the day knowing 2 things I did not know before - a good day. I did check Kew and Tropicos for herbarium specimens. Kew say they have a flower (not referred to as a type specimen). Tropicos claim a type specimen: "HT: Sander s.n.; Dec 1887; A cultivated plant imported from Mexico (W-15726) " (http://http://www.tropicos.org/Name/23521417). So the source is "A cultivated plant". There is also reference to The Gardeners' Chronicle ser. 3 3: 41. 1888.

Regards

[estación seca]

Originally Posted by dnatural1

So I am finishing the day knowing 2 things I did not know before - a good day. I did check Kew and Tropicos for herbarium specimens. Kew say they have a flower (not referred to as a type specimen). Tropicos claim a type specimen: "HT: Sander s.n.; Dec 1887; A cultivated plant imported from Mexico (W-15726) " (http://http://www.tropicos.org/Name/23521417). So the source is "A cultivated plant". There is also reference to The Gardeners' Chronicle ser. 3 3: 41. 1888.

Regards

The type specimen is the plant mentioned, but not illustrated, by Reichenbach in the Gardeners' Chronicle. He states it was imported by Sander. W is the herbarium at the Natural History Museum, Vienna. I will see whether I can look it up online.

[gdupont]

Originally Posted by Subrosa

Extinct is extinct. If there are none left in the wild, but they continue to exist they're considered extirpated.

I understand what extinct is... I was questioning the reliability of the source, and seeing what others knew about the subject.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[gdupont]

Originally Posted by estación seca

I did some digging, because I bought this from Andy's last December and mounted it on the jacaranda tree in front of my mom's house in southern Orange County, California.



From Status Survey and Conservation Action Plan: Orchids, Hagsater and Dumont, editors, IUCN. This can be found on Google Books.



https://books.google.com/books?id=9B...xtinct&f=false



"As far a we know, the only orchid that appears to be Extinct in the Wild in Mexico is Laelia gouldiana Rchb. f. This orchid has never been known in a wild state; all the specimens have been found growing on private property in the state of Hidalgo. The species is appreciated by the local people, who occasionally sell inflorescences and small pieces of plants to supplement their income."



There are quite a number of beautiful and useful plants in horticulture from México which have never been found in the wild. These were cultivated by Mexicans long before European contact. It is not certain whether they were wild species collected to extinction, or cultivars selected by ancient horticulturists. Other examples of these plants are most of the economically useful Agave species, and the bulb flower tuberose, which has previously been called Polianthes tuberosa.



After DNA work, the entire genus of Polianthes, together with sister genus Manfreda, have been transferred to Agave by taxonomists. The correct name for the tuberose is now Agave polianthes.



I might add... Almost every state in México has vast amounts of terrain unexplored by botanists. Who know whether Laelia gouldiana might not be discovered eventually in the wild? The Mexican Laelias are from mountainous country, which is usually very difficult to explore.

Thanks so much for this thorough response! I really appreciate it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[estación seca]

I bought the clone Andy sells called 'Greta Garbo', which was in Raymond Burr's collection. It's pretty high up on a tree because it wants to be left alone.