Question for you multifloral growers -- P philippenense roebelenii

[POLKA]

Is Paphiopedilum philippenense var. roebelenii and Paphiopedilum roebelenii the same? And if it is, what does this do to my Paph Saint Swithin tag??

Thanks for your consideration

Rex
aka POLKA
may all your orchids bloom like crazy!

[Paphluvr]

Consulting the Cash and Birk books on slipper orchids, they both seem to regard roebelenii to be a variant of Paph. philippinense. Since Paph. St Swithin is a cross between Paph. rothschildianum and Paph. philippinense I believe that even plants using the var. roebelenii would still be considered St Swithin. Therefore, no effect.

[billc]

Plants called roebelenii generally have longer and twisty petals. Most consider the various varieties of philippenense to be just philippenense. Your Saint Swithin would maybe have slightly longer petals but would still be a Saint Swithin. They are very nice flowers when in bloom.

Bill

[PaphMadMan]

Paphiopedilum philippenense var. roebelenii and Paphiopedilum roebelenii do refer to the same plant. For registration purposes no distinction is made between typical Paph phillipinense, or the forms sometimes called var. roebelenii or var. laevigatum, perhaps others. Unless you know the background of a particular cross there is no way know what form was used to make any Saint Swithin you see. Since all the forms are variable in petal length, petal twist, dorsal width, color, etc. I don't think it is meaningful to try to generalize about the differences you would expect in a hybrid from this form or that one. What matters are the characteristics of the particular parent plant.

[POLKA]

Thank you very much, all of you!!

My Saint Swithin happens to have the whole parentage on the tag --

[ Paphiopedilum philippenense var. roebelenii X Paphiopedilum rothschildianum 'Borneo' FCC AOS ]

< btw -- was this a good pairing with the roebelenii being the pod parent? I have had trouble blooming this thing >

I had asked some paph friends who haven't answered my query yet, so much obliged to you all!

I was concerned that some folks were treating P. roebelenii as a separate species. Being in the midst of the cattleya and oncidium / odontoglossum naming fiasco made me very concerned about my plant's identification.

You know, it is bad for you to loose a tag, and have no other identification for it.

It is completely another thing for someone to come along and change it for you without asking permission -- so to speak.

Thanks again for all your replies.
Appreciate your time and trouble to answer my query!

Take care
May all your orchids bloom like crazy

Rex
aka POLKA

[PaphMadMan]

The nature of taxonomy, like any science, is that we never know the final irrevocable answer, only to the best of our knowledge and general consensus at the moment. One thing that will probably always be debated is HOW different does a plant or population or form have to be to get a variety name, to be a different species, or even a different genus. But these are artificial distinctions we try to impose on the biological world. Living things are not obligated to neatly fit into the categories we would like to use. It is worth remembering that most of the time when there are disagreements on naming they aren't differences in our understanding of the relationships, just on where to draw these artificial lines.

It is worth maintaining a record of the full original name you got with the plant no matter what is official for hybrid registration. Prevailing opinions may change, and it may be horticulturally significant even if the taxonomy is debatable.

Most of the time, if Saint Swithin is difficult to bloom it is probably from the roth side of the family. If the breeder was smart they were using an easy-blooming plant as the pod parent to try to overcome the typically more reluctant roth bloomer.

If this type of cross is a truly mature and healthy plant and still not blooming after a couple years of excellent culture, you can try pushing the light level higher, cut the fertilizer (especially nitrogen), maybe a little chill. Nothing drastic, but something has to change to trigger flowering.

[Paphluvr]

Regarding the ease of bloom, how big is the plant? Many crosses containing Paph. rothschildianum need to be very mature in order to bloom (read multi-growth).

As far as Paph. roebelinii being a species, among botanists there are those who are lumpers and others who are splitters. Whether a plant (in this case roebelinii) is considered a species or a variety seems to hinge on which group has the most sway at this time. I hope I didn't offend any of you botanists out there!

[quiltergal]

I ran into a similar problem with my Phrag. Grande. It was made with caudatum var. warszewiczianum x longifolium. Later that caudatum was reclassified as simply warszewiczianum. Today if that cross was made the plant would be called Wossner Supergrande. So what do I call my plant?

[POLKA]

My plant was quite large -- 25 plus growths in an 8 inch pot -- tooooo muuuch niiiiiitrogen --

Some paph growers and I divided it into 4 large multi-growth divisions, and I am growing it much differently now. That was last winter/spring after 1 measly spike of 3 buds, two blasted.

Doug George near Houston, and Mitsi Runyan, and myself are growing them out, and seeing what transpires. Doug is a paph grower/seller, and Mitsi is an excellent paph grower. I'm following all your advice, and theirs.

Thanks again.

Rex