C Walkeriana

[Brooke]

Orchidsarefun please do not rely on Orchid Wiz for current updates on awards. If you want a current program that has the most current awards you need to get AQ Plus.

Orchid Wiz can no longer use AOS property to for own financial benefit. AOS awards belong to AOS.

Brooke

[orchidsarefun]

Originally Posted by Brooke

Orchidsarefun please do not rely on Orchid Wiz for current updates on awards. If you want a current program that has the most current awards you need to get AQ Plus.

Orchid Wiz can no longer use AOS property to for own financial benefit. AOS awards belong to AOS.

Brooke

Thanks for letting me know.
As for AQ Plus, that probably explains why I am not able to get an updated list of Awards direct from the AOS website. I am only a digital member.

[isurus79]

Originally Posted by orchidsarefun

I have been careful not to show any confirmation bias in my responses, having gone to AOS for clarification once my walkeriana was called a hybrid.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this point. However, I guess the fact that you refuse to read a post by a world class breeder who spoke to Mr. Yamada about his study's flaws and then dismiss such information as the "nitty gritty" parts of a post speaks more to cognitive dissonance than to confirmation bias.

Originally Posted by orchidsarefun

The irony in this is that I do not specialise in Catts, I have a single walkeriana and thus have no 'skin in the game.'

Not ironic. And I do specialize in Catts, with special deference for walkeriana and nobilior.

Originally Posted by orchidsarefun

The AOS is the 'ruling body' in the matter. You seem to agree with that ? They reclassified 'Kenny'. Its disingenuous to agree with the Kenny ruling but then say "The fact that AOS has not done scientific work but are relying on "opinions" from experts doesn't somehow make their opinion a fact either."

No, what I originally said is that the AOS got the 'Kenny' change correct, but is likely incorrect about 'Pendentive,' the parent of 'Kenny.' Again, if you'd read the post I pointed to, you'd know that by now.

[orchidsarefun]

if my 5 minute e-mails to the AOS gets a 5 year issue clarified, either way, then I am happy. Not everyone gets to do that in life, with so little effort. And in a public forum too !

[isurus79]

Originally Posted by orchidsarefun

if my 5 minute e-mails to the AOS gets a 5 year issue clarified, either way, then I am happy. Not everyone gets to do that in life, with so little effort. And in a public forum too !

Ha! I love it when a lively debate results in something tangible. I'll let you know if I'm able to help clarify the issue.

[Leafmite]

I think we all just need to wait until these are tested and reclassified by the committee (the one that has been renaming and reclassifying all the orchids) and the verdict is handed down. There is no real use in arguing any of this until then.
I have heard that some orchids have been moved completely to a new group (is it genus or alliance?) based on the DNA testing. I know this isn't going to happen in this case but it just shows the difference between what the eyes see and what a powerful microscope can see. That is why we cannot really have an argument here, not until we have these results.

I admit, I find some of the aspects of the orchid world just nuts...like species orchids that have been altered so much by breeding that they have lost their fragrance, the natural appearance and everything else and, yet, people still think that these same orchids are better than hybrids...really? You don't really find that with those that grow other plants. But then, I have grown other plants for a very long time and have always had a keen interest in genetics and conservation so, I admit, I see everything with a different perspective.

This was a good debate but I think it is time to just sit back and wait for the results.

[Orchidsoutdoors]

Originally Posted by Leafmite

I admit, I find some of the aspects of the orchid world just nuts...like species orchids that have been altered so much by breeding that they have lost their fragrance, the natural appearance and everything else and, yet, people still think that these same orchids are better than hybrids...really? You don't really find that with those that grow other plants. But then, I have grown other plants for a very long time and have always had a keen interest in genetics and conservation so, I admit, I see everything with a different perspective.

I agree with you completely, plant breeding, like dog breeding takes a small number of arbitrary traits and deems them 'necessary'. What it does to the genome of the wild species is narrow it down dramatically. Plant and animal showing is destroying natural genetic diversity and throwing out traits like disease tolerance, drought hardiness. For example, there are hundreds of thousands of Dendrobium speciosums grown in Australia, and most of them can trace their lineage down to a handful of individual plants. Plants from entire geographic areas are now extinct due to land clearing and the fact that their traits were not appealing to breeders and collectors. It's a crime.

The other thing about arguments on species purity is that, in the wild, many species wouldn't meet our requirements on genetic purity - many species are found with other species with which they can interbreed, leading to varying degrees of introgression. A plant may look completely like any other member of its species, but its DNA will show traces of its recent ancestors being a bit liberal with whom they'll share their genes...

[Leafmite]

Originally Posted by Orchidsoutdoors

I agree with you completely, plant breeding, like dog breeding takes a small number of arbitrary traits and deems them 'necessary'. What it does to the genome of the wild species is narrow it down dramatically. Plant and animal showing is destroying natural genetic diversity and throwing out traits like disease tolerance, drought hardiness. For example, there are hundreds of thousands of Dendrobium speciosums grown in Australia, and most of them can trace their lineage down to a handful of individual plants. Plants from entire geographic areas are now extinct due to land clearing and the fact that their traits were not appealing to breeders and collectors. It's a crime.

The other thing about arguments on species purity is that, in the wild, many species wouldn't meet our requirements on genetic purity - many species are found with other species with which they can interbreed, leading to varying degrees of introgression. A plant may look completely like any other member of its species, but its DNA will show traces of its recent ancestors being a bit liberal with whom they'll share their genes...

I started getting interested in this when I first began to collect species other than the Cattleyas. I would buy species that were famous for their fragrance and discover...no fragrance. The articles I have read have really changed how I look at orchid shows and judging...and other types of flower shows (for they are doing the same thing to many other types of flowers). As you have pointed out, many, like the Angraecums, are completely disappearing in the wild and we are completely losing the essence of these wild orchids, forever. I've read James Watson's DNA: The Secret of Life and it really made me realize just how far we can take it.
I still help at the orchid shows but I really wish that the AOS would judge species orchids on how much they actually look like the original species and try to maintain the qualities that they exhibited in the wild.

I have read about 'purity' of wild orchids, too. C. dolosa is a nice example and I am guessing quite a few other 'species' orchids are as well. When you look at many of them, it is very difficult to tell them apart. Pollinators are often opportunists.

[orchidsarefun]

its not only natural crosses by pollinators that impact 'purity'. Mericloning generation after generation of a specific cultivar for example does the same, as the cultivar with the most 'desirous traits' at the time is subsequently mericloned. Mericloning doesn't produce 100% genetic 'sameness'. I often come across people complaining that their cultivar doesn't look like somebody else's of the same name and its usually because the blooms or size of the plant are different.

And then there is the chemical 'enhancement', changing the ploidy, of orchid seeds in-vitro in an attempt to produce bigger, better. I have seen treated protocorms and its not a pretty sight.

'Desirous traits' are influenced by judges - for those who want to win subsequent awards. Also by the public. I have heard different judges say to me that they are looking for the 'wow factor' to the public -when finally deciding.

[ChrisFL]

The AOS is wrong. Pendentive is not walkeriana. Full stop.