Cattleya warscewiczii size question

[Louis_W]

Hey all,

I've been reading some old articles in the AOS archive, and wondering about Cattleya warscewiczii. According to the articles I read about the species, it can reach a size of 11 inches. Chadwick said it can top out at 12. I'd love to see that, so I went looking for a photo.

I combed through the AOS awards. All 82 of them. I was surprised to find that the largest flower ever awarded in America was only 7.79 (19.7 cm) inches across. Very beautiful, but far from the largest labiate cattleya

Why the extreem difference between reality and potential?

Does anyone know where to find a photo of such a giant flower?

[Roberta]

Do the mentions of 11 or 12 inches relate to the flower or the plant? I think it's the plant (which doesn't get terribly tall). 7-8 inches natural spread for a Catt flower is very good.

[Louis_W]

"The flowers measure eight to ten inches across and are very showy"
- Helen Adams in 'Cattleya warscewiczii, a history'

"Cattleya warscewiczii is not only the largest flowered of the cattleya genus with flowers that can reach 12 inches across from petal tip to petal tip, it also produces the largest flower spikes with as many as ten of these huge flowers per spike"
-Chadwick from 'the king of the mountain that heralds the arrival of summer'

"Cattleya warscewiczii is famous for the large size of its flower spike, which can have as many as 10 flowers, with each one being up to 12 inches across"
- Chadwick same article

The bloom itself is one of the largest in the whole cattleya family with an 8 or 9 inch spread not uncommon"
- R E Post Jr in 'the building blocks of the cattleya genus: cattleya warscewiczii'


I cant find the article that said 11 inches but you get the picture.

---------- Post added at 11:42 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:23 AM ----------

Originally Posted by isurus79

This is something us AOS judges have wondered for a while as well. Where do these fabled 12" flowers described by Chadwick exist? Maybe Big Foot has some growing in the dark forests of the Pacific Northwest?

Is there any chance the breeding would have favored form over size? It's hard to imagine that they would completely ignore a 12" flower because it's a little droopy.

There is also a lot of talk of the different varieties. Again, it seems doubtful that we would forget about the largest variety because of bad form or color.

[isurus79]

Originally Posted by Louis_W

Is there any chance the breeding would have favored form over size? It's hard to imagine that they would completely ignore a 12" flower because it's a little droopy.

There is also a lot of talk of the different varieties. Again, it seems doubtful that we would forget about the largest variety because of bad form or color.

I think you're right to think that size would not have been totally tossed aside in favor of form. Someone out there would be breeding for size!

[isurus79]

This is something us AOS judges have wondered for a while as well. Where do these fabled 12" flowers described by Chadwick exist? Maybe Big Foot has some growing in the dark forests of the Pacific Northwest?

[orchidman77]

I'm grumpy and think that people have exaggerated actual measurements. Sure, it's still huge in full bloom, and my tent's full of seedlings, so we'll see.

[Manfred Busche]

Cattleya warscewiczii are my favorites by a mile ... and so I have been pondering this question before.

My personal assumption :: in the early days of 'orchid craze' there might have been a colony of a few hundred of very large plants (3N , 4N ?) producing such large flowers , probably found at that time in an isolated pocket of the Colombian jungle.

But due to poor cultivation in those early days , these plants over decades have died one by one until none exist today.

This my assumption is somewhat supported by the following. I cultivate 1 plant of C. mendeli (repeat mendeli) , the still natural flowers of which are quite different to those of 'improved' C. mendelii. These natural C. mendeli flowers make me feel bored with the ever similar results of modern line breeding ... (smile)

Note that Mr. Chadwick senior writes of natural species plants ...

Remark :: my plants of C. warscewiczii regularly grow to 60 cms (p.bulb + leaf) , and flower size is 8+ in , but none comes near to what Chadwick writes ...

[estación seca]

It was at one time called Cattleya gigas.

[Manfred Busche]

According to Art Chadwick (personal communication) , son of the author of this piece :: Cattleya warscewiczii , his late father used to tell that those giant specimen were TRIPLOID forms of Cattleya warscewiczii.

And when at that time the technique of hybridization was mastered , new and attractive and non-pricey Cattleya hybrids would draw all the attention of the market.

And to make space in the greenhouses , those giant C. warscewiczii triploid plants were thrown to the garbage.

Gone forever !! Sad ...

This tale should answer this 'size question' , does it ?

[Louis_W]

Originally Posted by Manfred Busche

According to Art Chadwick (personal communication) , son of the author of this piece :: Cattleya warscewiczii , his late father used to tell that those giant specimen were TRIPLOID forms of Cattleya warscewiczii.

And when at that time the technique of hybridization was mastered , new and attractive and non-pricey Cattleya hybrids would draw all the attention of the market.

And to make space in the greenhouses , those giant C. warscewiczii triploid plants were thrown to the garbage.

Gone forever !! Sad ...

This tale should answer this 'size question' , does it ?

Thank you! This is good info! Questions remain! Aren't some of our modern plants also polyploids? No AOS awards for chadwicks giant plants? No photos? Still not sure if I buy it, but I want to believe!