More Nomenclature Questions...

[gixrj18]

Okay, I have some more breeding questions. If a primary hybrid has been previously made with normal variations of two plants, then does the offspring of the same two plants (of different variations) fall under the same registered name? Example: Doritis pulcherrima x Phal. violacea = Dtps. Kenneth Schubert. So would Doritis pulcherrima var chumpornensis x Phal. violacea var borneo = Dtps. Kenneth Schubert, or would this be a new hybrid?

[shakkai]

Hi Jason, it would be the same grex - BUT... it still pays to check with the RHS info. Some things that we call variations - or that are now accepted as variations by some people, are actually valid names for registration purposes, so would be a different grex.

This seems to happen with Paphs - or at least that's where I've run into it. For example:

when the taxonomy 'lumpers' get their way:

species A x species B = grex C

species A gets reclassified as species D var. A, grex C may still be valid.

[Royal]

I'd guess that that is the exact reason for 'Cultivar' names.

Again, it's just a guess but I'd say the hypothetical cross would be called:
Dtps. Kenneth Schubert 'gixrj18'

or how about this one:
Dtps. Kenneth Schubert 'Chumporneo'

[shakkai]

... or just Phal. now???

[Phantasm]

Technically this would be two different crosses.

Dtps. Kenneth Schubert = Doritis pulcherrima x Phal violacea.

Phalaenopsis violacea was divided into violacea and var. Borneo, and both forms have been used in hybridizing as Phal violacea.

More recently (10 years or so) Var. Borneo was determined to be a seperate speces: Phal bellina.

Doritis (now Phal) pulcherrima x Phal bellina has not been registered.

The forms of pulcherrima are considered just varieties of the species and are the same species for hybrid registrations.

One thing for certain is that the results of such crosses would be different depending on the parents/varieties used.

[Royal]

Good info. Thanks Phantasm.

OK, forget about specific crosses. Let's just say a Cattleya primary hybrid is registered. Then, later, a new variety of one of the parent species is recognized as a true variety. If a cross was made of the previously registered primary, but one parent is this newly recognized variety, is the result register-able? Or would it just be a new form of the original primary?

[gixrj18]

Originally Posted by Phantasm

Technically this would be two different crosses.

Dtps. Kenneth Schubert = Doritis pulcherrima x Phal violacea.

Phalaenopsis violacea was divided into violacea and var. Borneo, and both forms have been used in hybridizing as Phal violacea.

More recently (10 years or so) Var. Borneo was determined to be a seperate speces: Phal bellina.

Doritis (now Phal) pulcherrima x Phal bellina has not been registered.

The forms of pulcherrima are considered just varieties of the species and are the same species for hybrid registrations.

One thing for certain is that the results of such crosses would be different depending on the parents/varieties used.

Thank you Phantasm, and everyone else, that is the answer I was looking for. I made this cross (both ways), we'll see if it takes. Should be pretty interesting! Here's pics of the potential parents:

That is funny, Royal, I was thinking the exact same thing, this morning!

[Phantasm]

Originally Posted by RoyalOrchids

Good info. Thanks Phantasm.

OK, forget about specific crosses. Let's just say a Cattleya primary hybrid is registered. Then, later, a new variety of one of the parent species is recognized as a true variety. If a cross was made of the previously registered primary, but one parent is this newly recognized variety, is the result register-able? Or would it just be a new form of the original primary?

If it is just a variety of the species then the result is the same grex. If the variety was converted to a new species then it would be a new grex.