Cymbidium rectum - Orchid Board

abiom · #1 01-04-2010, 07:30 PM

I managed to snap this one the moment it opened up.

Cym Ladye · #2 01-04-2010, 07:37 PM

Abiom,

Thank you for posting photos of this species. It is virtually impossible to keep alive in cultivation for 99% of those growers attempting to do so. Having a record of its bloom is invaluable.

Are you growing this in cultivation or was it shot in the wild?

CL

abiom · #3 01-04-2010, 07:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cym Ladye

Abiom,

Thank you for posting photos of this species. It is virtually impossible to keep alive in cultivation for 99% of those growers attempting to do so. Having a record of its bloom is invaluable.

Are you growing this in cultivation or was it shot in the wild?

CL

Thx CL. The plant is in my garden. So far it's doing fine. I think the raining season was the reason it gave out 2 spikes.

Cym Ladye · #4 01-04-2010, 07:55 PM

Abiom,

How long have you had it?

King_of_orchid_growing:) · #5 01-06-2010, 11:39 PM

Alrighty then...

As much as I got a chuckle out of the butt jokes in connection to Cym rectum, other bits about the strange naming of plants (whether they're meant as tongue-in-cheek insults or just plain humorous innuendo), and off-beat stories of retribution by orchid taxonomists...

I'd like to know a little about what Cym Ladye had said:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cym Ladye

Abiom,

Thank you for posting photos of this species. It is virtually impossible to keep alive in cultivation for 99% of those growers attempting to do so. Having a record of its bloom is invaluable.

Are you growing this in cultivation or was it shot in the wild?

CL

Why so difficult?

johnblagg · #6 01-04-2010, 08:07 PM

I just cant believe its last name is rectum .....LMAO

Cym Ladye · #7 01-04-2010, 08:14 PM

Sadly, it is. Registered by Ridley in 1920 from a specimen found on the Malay Peninsula. Blame RHS for allowing it.

Trivia for the day

CL

Andrew · #8 01-04-2010, 09:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cym Ladye

Sadly, it is. Registered by Ridley in 1920 from a specimen found on the Malay Peninsula. Blame RHS for allowing it.

Cymbidium erecta had been taken (twice) and its main distinguishing feature is the erect spike. There probably wasn't much of a choice. According the the monocot checklist, you should blame the Straits Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, not the RHS.

kavanaru · #9 01-05-2010, 03:03 AM

Very nice flowers

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew

Cymbidium erecta had been taken (twice) and its main distinguishing feature is the erect spike. There probably wasn't much of a choice. According the the monocot checklist, you should blame the Straits Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, not the RHS.

Keeping in mind this is a species, neither the RHS nor any other horticultural group can be blamed for accepting the name... That's not their business in this cases! The only one to be blamed (if that would be necessary - which I think is not the case here!) would be the botanists naming the species!

RHS and other horticultural groups very often accept names which can be quite funny or politically incorrect, as that's the name given by the hybridizers self, and the RHS has not much to say there, e.g. Paph Ho Chi Min (considered by many as insulting for the vietnamese folk) or Phrag. Prince Albert (pearcei x M. Dick Clemens)

As Ron said, the name itself has nothing bad in it, but the association people does with the human anatomy (which by the way, is called rectum because it is the only part of the human larger intestine which is "more or less" straight and vertical: between the anus and the rest of the intestine - most people wrognly think actually that the anus is the rectum! Anal cancer: Treatment - Patient Information [NCI PDQ] - AOL Health)

Andrew · #10 01-05-2010, 06:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kavanaru

Keeping in mind this is a species, neither the RHS nor any other horticultural group can be blamed for accepting the name... That's not their business in this cases! The only one to be blamed (if that would be necessary - which I think is not the case here!) would be the botanists naming the species!

The Strait Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society was not a hortricultural group. It was the scholarly society that published the description of this species in its journal. While it's hard not to find some humour in the name, I don't have a problem with Ridley's choice of a name. Moving beyond this case, while I agree that the author of the munuscript bears the blame for the work they submit for publication in a journal, it is not unreasonable to question the editorial board of a journal for misjudging the merit of manuscripts they publish. Scientists are always complaining about journals placing more emphasis on impact and politics than scientific merit when accepting papers. As a more extreme example of this, lets not forget how red-faced Science was after the Hwang Woo-Suk fraud.