Hybrid naming convention for mutated mericlonesss

[SouthPark]

Is there a naming convention for naming mericloned hybrids where the new mericlone developed a mutation?

For example, an orchid that somebody at one stage decided to give a mericloned hybrid this following designation:

Rlc. Memoria Helen Brown 'Sweet Afton' var. Splash.

The original plant hybrid cultivar is 'Sweet Afton', and mutation certainly did eventually set in from some mericloning processes. I do notice some orchid sellers appear to be knowingly or even unknowingly sell either "remakes" or even mutant versions of so-called 'Sweet Afton'. Of course, a "remake" doesn't count as 'Sweet Afton'. A mutation really doesn't count as well.

I have a plant (with its flower shown in the snippet attachment) that is a mutant mericlone of 'Sweet Afton'. The lip features is just like the original 'Sweet Afton'. The difference is that the petals of my particular mutant has splashes of colour on the tips/edges - unlike the original plant - where the original doesn't have the colouring on the leaf tips. Apart from that - the lip features of my particular mutated form aligns extremely well with the original - lip rim features, colour pattern etc.

So, just very interested to see whether the name that I see on the internet ... ie. Rlc. Memoria Helen Brown 'Sweet Afton' var. Splash is using an incorrect naming convention. And, if it's the wrong naming convention, then was wondering if there is (or should be) a naming convention for mutated hybrids.

Originally, I had this post within the 'what is a clone?' thread, but thought I'd transfer it here, as it departs from the topic of 'what is a clone?'.

Is there a convention for mutations such as Rlc. Memoria Helen Brown 'Sweet Afton' m. Splash? With 'm.' being a codeword for 'mutation/mutant'.

Or would it be acceptable to just go with Rlc. Memoria Helen Brown 'Sweet Afton' var. Splash? With 'var.' normally linked to species (not hybrids) as Roberta correctly mentioned.

Or is there a convention we can follow already?

Otherwise, since DNA has changed, then would it be necessary for somebody to give a new cultivar name altogether, like Rlc. Memoria Helen Brown 'Sweet Afton Splash'?

[ArronOB]

My understanding is that it could be called either

Rlc Memoria Helen Brown “splash”

Or

Rlc Memoria Helen Brown “Sweet Afton”

Or

Rlc Memoria Helen Brown “any other name you choose”

The Sweet Afton is already a variation of the Helen Brown grex so no need to double up. There will be many variations on Helen Brown and whether a breeder chooses a different name or not is fairly arbitrary - and perhaps more often due to marketing.

The fact that it’s a mutation isn’t that important. All mericloned orchids are on a continuum of mutation from so few as to be not discernible to very obvious.

[SouthPark]

Thanks very much for your contribution Arron!

It sounds good. Although, my assumption of 'Sweet Afton' is that it is a unique variety from the Grex of Memoria Helen Brown. The uniqueness is in the DNA. If the DNA changes, then it's no longer 'Sweet Afton'.

I do agree that if there is no visible superficial difference between a particular mutation and the original, then I can understand some people are still ok to call it 'Sweet Afton' (especially if they didn't know that the DNA changed).

I am growing a few supposedley proper (true-form) 'Sweet Afton' too, but still waiting for them to eventually get some flowering activity started - and then it will be interesting to see what these ones turn out to look like.

I'm happy with the lip shape and colour with the mutated one though, which was what I was hoping for. So that side of things is good.

Determining whether or not the AOS/RHS etc people have some naming convention for a mutation of a named cultivar was something I had been thinking about.

I think I'll go with Rlc. Memoria Helen Brown 'Sweet Afton Splash' --- to avoid getting into the species var. territory. This is only for my name tagging purposes - not selling purposes etc, as this name could probably be an illegal violation, since 'Sweet Afton' was registered.

Thanks Arron!

[ArronOB]

Originally Posted by SouthPark

Thanks very much for your contribution Arron!

It sounds good. Although, my assumption of "Sweet Afton" is that it is a unique variety from the Grex of Memoria Helen Brown. The uniqueness is in the DNA. If the DNA changes, then it's no longer "Sweet Afton".

I do agree that if there is no visible superficial difference between a particular mutation and the original, then I can understand some people are still ok to call it "Sweet Afton" (especially if they didn't know that the DNA changed).

I am growing a few supposedley proper (true-form) "Sweet Afton" too, but still waiting for them to eventually get some flowering activity started - and then it will be interesting to see what these ones turn out to look like.

I'm happy with the lip shape and colour with the mutated one though, which was what I was hoping for. So that side of things is good.

Determining whether or not the AOS/RHS etc people have some naming convention for a mutation of a named cultivar was something I had been thinking about.

I think I'll go with Rlc. Memoria Helen Brown "Sweet Afton Splash" --- to avoid getting into the species var. territory. This is only for my name tagging purposes - not selling purposes etc, as this name could probably be an illegal violation, since "Sweet Afton" was registered.

Thanks Arron!

My understanding is that the grex Mem Helen Brown will be registered, but the clonal name (in this case Sweet Afton) is not the subject of registration.

Doing a search of the Intl Orchid Register I find only one entry for Oncostele wildcat, despite the fact it’s clonal names must number in the hundreds by now.

Can anyone confirm this?

[SouthPark]

Thanks Arron! I need to check. I think Roberta mentioned that awarded orchids can be registered or something. Maybe not registered with RHS that is. But officially registered with AOS, AOC etc. 'Sweet Afton' was awarded, so I assume it just went into the official books of AOS, AOC etc.

I just found a link that mentions cultivars... from RHS, but --- I don't think they make it clear about whether they register clonal names, or not. Would be nice if their web-site just tells us straight up. I think you're right though. I can't find any records of clonal names in the RHS orchid lists. It looks like the awarded plant clonal records will only be with the other societies --- like AOS and AOC, which is nice to know.

https://www.rhs.org.uk/plants/pdfs/p...guidelines.pdf

[ArronOB]

Why don’t you settle it by naming it

rlc Mem Helen Brown “SouthPark”

It’s just as valid and you get the kudos.

I think the only registration below grex is for ‘group names’.

Further

I don’t think the AOS registers orchids. Their focus on clonal names is to record the clonal name of an awarded Orchid so we know which one got the gong.

No doubt our US based experts will wake up shortly and sort this out for us.

[SouthPark]

hahaha! Nice one Arron! I would love to name the cultivar like that!! Possibly some barriers to face, like from the SouthPark company, and the SouthPark county in USA hahaha. It would be nice though!

I'm not sure about history of this particular mutated 'Sweet Afton'. I will ask the grower that sold it to me to find out where it originated from - such as from a flasked mericlone from USA.

Thanks for letting me know that AOS doesn't register cultivar/clonal names! This is definitely interesting. Thanks Arron!

[Ray]

I’m not sure there is a “norm” when it comes to mutations. Some will feel that being a clone of ‘Sweet Afton’, it must still be ‘Sweet Afton’. Others will feel that if it is a mutation, it is different, so qualifies for its own cultivar epithet.

Personally, I vote with the latter group. I suppose you could make it a variation, such as ‘Squirrelly Sweet Afton’.

[SouthPark]

Thanks Ray. I personally vote for the latter group too. I agree with (and like) that style of variation of a theme.

[SouthPark]

Originally Posted by Ray

Some will feel that being a clone of ‘Sweet Afton’, it must still be ‘Sweet Afton’.

That's what raised my eyebrows, and I've noticed (on the internet) some growers just putting up photos of their flower, and calling their plant 'Sweet Afton'.

Mainly surprised that they seem to not know that their plant's flower doesn't have 'Sweet Afton' features. All awarded plants don't have serrated edges on the lip rim. And none of the awarded plants (including ones grown by new and old-school fans of this old plant, plus other growers too) have colour that covers almost the entirety of the lip.

This would be a nice topic of discussion --- not the colour variation due to culture and growing conditions --- but about the chances of lip rim pattern developing ancestor traits like serrated toothy edges (not exhibited by the original 'Sweet Afton').

Just attaching a pic of the original plant's flower (that somebody had scanned from the fairly-old catalog). The catalog (which I haven't got) is definitely an artifact. A nice tribute to that orchid and that old company - which I have read isn't around anymore. But not forgotten!