Cool cross between Cattleya rex and luteola. Of interest, a friend on my Facebook post pointed out that Cattleya x blossfeldiana was not properly described, therefore, the name isn't taxonomically valid even though RHS shows it as a valid taxon. I went down a rabbit hole and could only find
this link that discusses Cattleya x blossfeldiana (scroll down to Cattleya mooreana).
That link says "Cattleya blossfeldiana Krackow., Orchis 22: 1 (1944) [nom. nud., germanice]." So we have x blossfeldiana with a description publication where Krackow is the author, Orchis is the publication, 22 is the issue, 1 is the page number, and 1944 is the publication year. Of note is that nom. nud. stands for "nomen nudum" which basically means the description publication was inadequate for some reason, therefore, the name x blossfeldiana is not legit.
My friend also pointed out that Cattleya Belle Mariza was registered in 2007 with RHS and is the artificial cross between rex and luteola. Therefore, Cattleya x blossfeldiana doesn't exist and Belle Mariza is the only valid name for this cross. Some cool stuff! I made a YouTube video about my plant here:
https://youtu.be/hfUPDGHXPkM
Cattleya Blossfeldiana by
Stephen Van Kampen-Lewis, on Flickr
Cattleya Blossfeldiana by
Stephen Van Kampen-Lewis, on Flickr
Cattleya x blossfeldiana
Threaded Mode
