Why is this plant an Lc.? - Orchid Board

RJSquirrel · #1 09-19-2011, 07:56 AM

okey we have a Lc. Mary Elizabeth Bohn`Royal Flare' Cattleya Orchid Plant...it parents are im Reading a Ctt.(Cattlianthe) and C. bowringiana. Parents of Ctt. are Guarianthe and Cattleya. Now this one was made with Lc Blue Boy which is Lc. elegans 'Werkhauserii' (Laelia purpurata x Cattleya guttata). The other parent is C. Ariel coerulea 'Bodnant's. How do they get an Lc out of all this?

Eyebabe · #2 09-19-2011, 08:13 AM

You are using the Sanders classification with "Lc."
My understanding is that the names have been changed to reflect more closely the issues you have described.

The current accepted name is Ctt. Mary Elizabeth Bohn.

That is about as much as know of taxonomy

Merlyn · #3 09-19-2011, 11:06 AM

My view is the less you know about taxonomy the better off you'll be ! Unless you're a breeder or going to breed. Whatever is on the tag when I acquire it is what I'll use. The worst that can happen is the purists will say the name you're using is a synonym !

camille1585 · #4 09-19-2011, 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eyebabe

You are using the Sanders classification with "Lc."
My understanding is that the names have been changed to reflect more closely the issues you have described.

The current accepted name is Ctt. Mary Elizabeth Bohn.

That is about as much as know of taxonomy

I was figuring that it was the explanation as well. The Cattleya alliance has been so thoroughly shuffled around, divided and merged that it's a miracle that some still have the same name afterward.
I've lost track of how many labels I've had to change on various plants. Mainly changing all the Dtps. labels over to Phals. Orchidwiz has been a big help is keeping up with the name changes. The taxonomists really keep us on our toes!

RosieC · #5 09-19-2011, 04:39 PM

Yeap, I agree as well. Sounds like it's classification has changed but the label on yours is still using an old classification. That happens all the time, especially it seems with the Catt Alliance.

Merlyn · #6 09-19-2011, 05:40 PM

An Lc. by any other name . . . . .

RJSquirrel · #7 09-19-2011, 09:25 PM

ahhh makes more sense that me with an "old" tag trying to reconcile it with new information. Okey I'm trying to learn more about all of it ya know. Its very interesting to ME to go back and look at the progeny of the plant(s) and try to pick out traits that were passed down, across, over, under backward, forwards and sideways ending upside down. What has been retained over time VS improvements over the flowers of the originals. If you look at some old photos of some of these plants, They are unrecognizable and often alien to what they have become now.

Thanks You

and I got 4 buds that finally broke thru the sheath today on it

silken · #8 09-19-2011, 09:41 PM

Can't wait to see your "Lc" Mary Elizabeth Bohn! I had one and managed to kill it.

And my suspicion is if you hold onto the old tag with the 'Lc" on it, in time they will likely change it back again

littlefrog · #9 09-19-2011, 09:58 PM

Don't change your tag... Rumor is afoot that the cattleya alliance will be shuffled yet again.

Personally I ignore any tag that uses Guaranthe in the name. Actually of all the changes that one makes the most sense, but I'm not changing my tags. All of my encyclias are still labeled encyclia, too.

glengary54 · #10 09-19-2011, 10:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by littlefrog

Don't change your tag... Rumor is afoot that the cattleya alliance will be shuffled yet again.

Personally I ignore any tag that uses Guaranthe in the name. Actually of all the changes that one makes the most sense, but I'm not changing my tags. All of my encyclias are still labeled encyclia, too.

Not to confuse the issue or to throw fuel on the fire,but, in this case the Lc label is correct. Once a plant is awarded it is correct and proper to retain the original genus name even if they have been reclassified.

The taxonomists are scientists and not botanists and couldn't give a rats behind about the confusion and inconvenience all of their reclassifications cause. The real confusion comes when different genera are condensed into one and there are hybrids of the same name from multiple genera, which is against the rules of RHS orchid nomenclature.

I for one like the old names, especially in the hybrids of the Cattleya alliance plants, when one says Cattleya, Laelia or Sophronitis one can picture the basic shape of the flower being talked about. When they are combined into one genus it's any ones guess what the flower may look like without knowing the whole genealogy.