HP Norton - Best Phal Breeder on the Planet?

[ockham]

Hi everyone.... I am not primary a Phalaenopsis collector, but I love all white large classic hybrids and I have intentions to start to have it has a theme with my other current themes inside the orchidophilia (some of them with more than 20 years)... My crush with phals are from pure large whites to no more than whites whit pink infusions like some Maki Watanabe (not the pink-pink ones)... I few words, In whites I like the traditional ones with yellow-red veinin lip, not the ones with the solid ''equestris'' lip.

Since I want to know more on this particular subject, can I ask the opinion of the people here about good reading (internet or more formal) and the group criteria of the best growers of large white hybrids (USA and Abroad), and the best classic and new hybrids (not necessarily the more popular) on the market .


Edit. By the way I am very new in this thing about Phalaenopsis, I only have Phalaenopsis maki watanabe, and Phalaenopsis taisuco crane. None of them I know the cultivar.

Thanks a lot
Ockham

[ockham]

By the way... why modern white hybrid production don´t use phalaenopsis philippinensis????

I know that wasn't formally introduced till 1987, but that was more than 20 years ago and I wonder why this new blood line is not used.


Edit. If someone knows how add philippinensis blood to large ''whites'' look like, well I will be delighted to see how it looks

Again, thanks a lot
Ockham

[Pete]

Upon further reading, I might suggest adding Frank Smith to the short list of quality phal breeders.

And here I thought Phal. H.P. Norton was an HP cross...

[Undergrounder]

Originally Posted by ockham

Hi everyone.... I am not primary a Phalaenopsis collector, but I love all white large classic hybrids and I have intentions to start to have it has a theme with my other current themes inside the orchidophilia (some of them with more than 20 years)... My crush with phals are from pure large whites to no more than whites whit pink infusions like some Maki Watanabe (not the pink-pink ones)... I few words, In whites I like the traditional ones with yellow-red veinin lip, not the ones with the solid ''equestris'' lip.

Since I want to know more on this particular subject, can I ask the opinion of the people here about good reading (internet or more formal) and the group criteria of the best growers of large white hybrids (USA and Abroad), and the best classic and new hybrids (not necessarily the more popular) on the market .


Edit. By the way I am very new in this thing about Phalaenopsis, I only have Phalaenopsis maki watanabe, and Phalaenopsis taisuco crane. None of them I know the cultivar.

Thanks a lot
Ockham

Both of the plants you have are good examples of the thing you want... The largest whites get to about 15cm wide, although at that size they lose a bit of shape, flower count and presentation. When they get 'down' to about 11-12cm, large plants exist with perfect shape and presentation and huge flower counts. Some of the nicer large whites are:

Sogo Yukidian 'V3'
Sogo Yukidian 'Ping Tung King'
Taisuco Wonder
Taisuco Crane
Join Angel
Join Grace
I-Hsin Snow Bear
Cygnus

Some of the nicer pink blush on whites are:

Hsinying Maki 'Shot Gun'
Maki Watanabi
Nobby's Amy (variable - some cvs. are nice, others horrible)
Sogo Genki
Mount Lip 'Spring Song'

There are zillions of great hybrids, new patterns and colours, it really depends what you like..

By the way... why modern white hybrid production don´t use phalaenopsis philippinensis????

I think 1. Because for today's fashions, philippensis doesn't have much more to add - flowers are smaller, more open, less substance, not as flat, crowded on the spike, etc. Fashion has tended to favour larger, flatter, fuller flowers and large whites are better in these departments.

2. Because adding philippensis to large white hybrid lines would create mainly sterile, 3n mules in the first generation. It would take a bit of foresight, time and effort to introduce philippensis without this problem.

There are some really nice line-bred philippensis posted on the bigleaf forums at the moment.. i think this is basically what a large white x philippensis would look like.

Big Leaf Orchid forum • View topic - Phal philippinensis from Orchidview
Big Leaf Orchid forum • View topic - another phillipinensis

[Royal]

Originally Posted by Undergrounder

2. Because adding philippensis to large white hybrid lines would create mainly sterile, 3n mules in the first generation. It would take a bit of foresight, time and effort to introduce philippensis without this problem.

This is a great point, I was going to say the same thing but now I don't need to.

I do like the idea of using phlippinensis to create some new big whites that would open all its flowers at once. I also love the yellow side lobes. It won't be long before we have some verified 4n plants of this species available. Here's to hoping!

[ockham]

Thank you very much undergrounder, I am going to keep and print this list. Also I loved the info about quantitatively the know threshold between quality and the possible maximum covered area. I knew that the threshold existed, but I din´t knew it quantitatively and more detailed that was a narrow easy to manage range between 11 and 12..... I mean, many times things like the substance or other concomitants inside the hybrid-line gene pool had the power to ''relativisize'' how large this range would be (lets say 2-3 cm make the range between minimum and maximum non informative if I may say). Thanks a lot again

Regarding philippensis, I understand what you said, but I still think the lack of philippensis in some white breeding lines is somehow ''negligent'', I mean, if a polyploid is crossed whit 2n obteining a F2 of ''mules'' (3n, 5n), is still possible even if it difficult to obtain an f3 with more stable 2(x)n plants, also the polyploidy induced in philippensis protocorns is possible to better the results (for example colchicine).... Maybe all species are comparatively ''poor'' to ''very poor'' to the complex hybrid, making at first glance irrelevant its use, but the sole fact of new blood added to a genetically quite narrow line (bottleneck or genetic drift), had bay itself many potential possibilities.

Thanks a lot
Ockham

Originally Posted by Undergrounder

Both of the plants you have are good examples of the thing you want... The largest whites get to about 15cm wide, although at that size they lose a bit of shape, flower count and presentation. When they get 'down' to about 11-12cm, large plants exist with perfect shape and presentation and huge flower counts. Some of the nicer large whites are:

Sogo Yukidian 'V3'
Sogo Yukidian 'Ping Tung King'
Taisuco Wonder
Taisuco Crane
Join Angel
Join Grace
I-Hsin Snow Bear
Cygnus

Some of the nicer pink blush on whites are:

Hsinying Maki 'Shot Gun'
Maki Watanabi
Nobby's Amy (variable - some cvs. are nice, others horrible)
Sogo Genki
Mount Lip 'Spring Song'

There are zillions of great hybrids, new patterns and colours, it really depends what you like..



I think 1. Because for today's fashions, philippensis doesn't have much more to add - flowers are smaller, more open, less substance, not as flat, crowded on the spike, etc. Fashion has tended to favour larger, flatter, fuller flowers and large whites are better in these departments.

2. Because adding philippensis to large white hybrid lines would create mainly sterile, 3n mules in the first generation. It would take a bit of foresight, time and effort to introduce philippensis without this problem.

There are some really nice line-bred philippensis posted on the bigleaf forums at the moment.. i think this is basically what a large white x philippensis would look like.

Big Leaf Orchid forum • View topic - Phal philippinensis from Orchidview
Big Leaf Orchid forum • View topic - another phillipinensis

[Undergrounder]

I don't think it's negligent, just an accident of history. Large white breeding stems almost entirely from a very few polyploid plants made in the 1940s and 50s in the US, and then refined significantly in the 1980s and 90s in Taiwan. It was polyploidy and highly selective breeding in very large populations that contributed to what we see today, which look almost nothing like the aphrodite and amabilis species from which they originate.

So i agree with the second point you made... since it was introduced to cultivation as its own species in the 1980s, the mere fact that it was a wild, 2n species made it look 'poor' in comparison with complex large white lines and stopped it being used.

And it is the same today. From the breeder's point of view, it makes sense to avoid it.. Regardless of ploidy, when you outcross a highly inbred line to an unrelated species, you're going to get a large number of inferior plants - in the case of philippinensis, a lot of open plants, recurved plants, poor growing, hard flowering plants, etc. The chances of getting a plant with all the attributes you want - free flowering, fast growing, shape and form of a large white, high flower count of philippinensis, concurrent opening, large yellow lobes, etc. will be tiny in the F1 population, and will probably take a large number of plants and successive generations to reach...

I think the race has been run and won as far as large whites go, and trying to introduce new genes for minor changes would be a lot of hard work for comparatively little gain.

I don't believe white lines have 'suffered' from inbreeding depression too much in terms of what is important in cultivation. With recombination you might get more genetic variety across the loci, but that would not necessarily be a good thing for the reasons above.

if a polyploid is crossed whit 2n obteining a F2 of ''mules'' (3n, 5n), is still possible even if it difficult to obtain an f3 with more stable 2(x)n plants, also the polyploidy induced in philippensis protocorns is possible to better the results (for example colchicine)

I don't think you can understate the difficulty of moving past 3n. Sure i guess it's possible, but you are going to be severely limited by fertility problems from the outset. If you were able to cross 3n x 4n (i would move to 4n, not 2n, although the same applies for 3n x 2n), you would get very few stable ploidy plants in the next generation, with most being aneuploid and suffering a high rate of negative mutations and growth problems. If you are relying on back and sib crossing to get the results you want, having 3n plants will likely be a dead end.

By far the better option is the second one - polyploid treating the philippensis. But even here you will need a way to accurately verify the success of your conversion, because the cost of accidentally using an unconverted plant where you thought it was 4n will lead you back to where you started - 3n plants.

But the whole idea of treating Phal. species to achieve polyploidy is very new. If philippinensis were to be combined with large whites, it would probably be this way - and hopefully done ethically so to avoid stuffing up what have traditionally been very clean and free breeding lines.

[ockham]

That I can understand, if the offspring have to much variability and the very few good cases don´t add to much, them is not possible to to compare it with lets say complex corsage cattleya hybrids experiments that only just a very small quantity worth the effort but the effort adds more than ''few''. If that is the case, and the sole enter of new genes aren´t enough them I am with you 100%.. Also 4n I agree is the best way to introduce philippensis the same way 4n colchicine sophronitis was the responce to jewell artshade compact cattleyas.

I didin´t took in account the small improve philippensis would have simply because in terms of variability, classic whites are much less variable than standard Classic corsage complex Cattleya hybrids... them, add ''few'' become add ''more'' at least for a outside look of it, but only someone inside the business like you can know if ths ''more'' is actually ''more''... I simply lack the know-how in this orchid genetic melioration area.

About genetic drift and bottlenecks, well, in highly uniform lines of breding, translocations more than allele diversity are the main factors of genetic diversity, them sooner than later the accumulations of genetic trash mutations will reduce the fertility of the hybrids more than the partial incompatibility between species. That happens with Cattleya complex Hybrids lines at least. Put for example cheetahs, they are the result of a bottleneck at glacial era that reduced to almost extinction the species, this lack of genetic diversity, is the cause that cheetahs are the more infertile felines even in cases were matting couples possibilities are very diverse... what I am triying to say here is that avoid selfings arent enogh to avoid genetic makeup future problems inside small sized population of founders of a now large population of phenotypically diverse hybrids.... not allways phenotype diversity means genotype diversity If i may say.

[Undergrounder]

Originally Posted by ockham

About genetic drift and bottlenecks, well, in highly uniform lines of breding, translocations more than allele diversity are the main factors of genetic diversity, them sooner than later the accumulations of genetic trash mutations will reduce the fertility of the hybrids more than the partial incompatibility between species. That happens with Cattleya complex Hybrids lines at least. Put for example cheetahs, they are the result of a bottleneck at glacial era that reduced to almost extinction the species, this lack of genetic diversity, is the cause that cheetahs are the more infertile felines even in cases were matting couples possibilities are very diverse... what I am triying to say here is that avoid selfings arent enogh to avoid genetic makeup future problems.

Thanks, that is interesting. I do not pretend to be an expert in genetics by any stretch of the imagination but if this is so I am not sure why Phal. white hybrids do not suffer from the same infertility problems of old Cattleya hybrids. Because All large whites stem almost entirely from a bottleneck - a handful of chance 4n plants - Phal. Doris, Elisabethae and Katherine Siegwart - And at least nowadays, they all breed freely. I would not suggest permanent line-breeding or crossing of closely related lines, but within the large range of whites available today, i have not seen evidence of fertility problems that apparently exist in Cattleya.

[ockham]

Well in Venezuela Phalaenopsis market are 50/50% mericlones imported from mainly from Taiwan but also there is a large market for seed propagation that meet any criteria (((seedlings, selfs and siblings))) just because market is relatively small to mericloning costs and many non orchidophile buyers really don´t see to much difference (discrimination) between regular, normal, good, very good and superb plants.

What orchid vendors told me here on the subject is that Phalaenopsis flowers are more difficult to form pods than species, also seed productivity x pod and seed viability is more compromised if is compared with phalaenopsis species, same thing with Cattleyas and complex Cattleya hybrids.... Maybe the seed viability is just noticeable comparing both (I don´t know).

Is to much bother from my side to ask you the genealogy and personal opinions involved in Phal. Doris, Elisabethae and Katherine Siegwart... I am curious

Originally Posted by Undergrounder

Thanks, that is interesting. I do not pretend to be an expert in genetics by any stretch of the imagination but if this is so I am not sure why Phal. white hybrids do not suffer from the same infertility problems of old Cattleya hybrids. Because All large whites stem almost entirely from a bottleneck - a handful of chance 4n plants - Phal. Doris, Elisabethae and Katherine Siegwart - And at least nowadays, they all breed freely. I would not suggest permanent line-breeding or crossing of closely related lines, but within the large range of whites available today, i have not seen evidence of fertility problems that apparently exist in Cattleya.