Phal. mariae

[orchidsworld]

If you want to see a real mariae, look at this one : http://www.phals.net/mariae/06ph0131.jpg

This one is truly a mariae, no doubt (I have a keiki from this plant )

[RosieC]

Well I can't comment on it's ID, but it's a wonderful looking flower anyway.

[gixrj18]

Okay....sorry about the lazy, low-resolution pictures on such a controversial flower. Here is some nice close-ups so you guys can see all the features. Whichever one it is, it's going to take some good proof for me to change the tag.

[trdyl]

Beautiful color!

[goodgollymissmolly]

I have no desire to get you to change a tag or do anything else. I have two of these that are not what they were sold as. No one (at least not me) is beating you up. Just commenting on the picture you posted.

I recently posted a similar picture, as I said originally, and was finally convinced (by people who know) that I did not have mariae. It's not a knock on you or I. Mariae is just rare as hell in the US and as I understand it elsewhere also. Unfortunately, either through ignorance or greed, vendors are selling the wrong plant. Heck, I even got a little mutt labeled bastianii that was mislabeled from a well known Phal specialist.I also got an inscriptiosinensis labeled as sumatrana. I just paid $150 for a guaranteed sumatrana because I am so pi**ed off at the incorrect labeling that is rampant. I got a micholitzii hybrid sold as a floresensis.

Ain't just you. It's all of us looking to get Phal species that have a rough road. I'm starting a new approach. If I buy it and it's wrong it's coming back to you. If you don't agree then, I'll get it elsewhere. Since I'm willing to spend whatever it takes I don't think too many suppliers will refuse that deal. If there is a dispute, I'm more than willing to submit it to a taxonomist at my expense. If it isn't what you said, you refund the taxonomy fee to me. It's cheaper to pay for the right thing than to buy numerous wrong things, not to mention the time lag involved.

You call it whatever pleases you. That was never my point.

[gixrj18]

Originally Posted by goodgollymissmolly

I have no desire to get you to change a tag or do anything else. I have two of these that are not what they were sold as. No one (at least not me) is beating you up. Just commenting on the picture you posted.

I recently posted a similar picture, as I said originally, and was finally convinced (by people who know) that I did not have mariae. It's not a knock on you or I. Mariae is just rare as hell in the US and as I understand it elsewhere also. Unfortunately, either through ignorance or greed, vendors are selling the wrong plant. Heck, I even got a little mutt labeled bastianii that was mislabeled from a well known Phal specialist.I also got an inscriptiosinensis labeled as sumatrana. I just paid $150 for a guaranteed sumatrana because I am so pi**ed off at the incorrect labeling that is rampant. I got a micholitzii hybrid sold as a floresensis.

Ain't just you. It's all of us looking to get Phal species that have a rough road. I'm starting a new approach. If I buy it and it's wrong it's coming back to you. If you don't agree then, I'll get it elsewhere. Since I'm willing to spend whatever it takes I don't think too many suppliers will refuse that deal. If there is a dispute, I'm more than willing to submit it to a taxonomist at my expense. If it isn't what you said, you refund the taxonomy fee to me. It's cheaper to pay for the right thing than to buy numerous wrong things, not to mention the time lag involved.

You call it whatever pleases you. That was never my point.

....and I thank you for that, because as I've experienced (and it sounds like you have, too) There are some people on here that take great pleasure in telling you how wrong you are. Plus, personally, I think these plants can have slight variations, and I don't think some people give them enough credit....they're going to change a little bit. So, because of this, I'm very leary of changing a plants identity just because someone told me it's wrong. I am glad this is not your motive, and thank you for that. I welcome your comments, and appreciate them.

[OrchidSue]

I find these discussions very interesting, though somewhat frustrating. Taxonomy is far from an exact science mainly due to the variability of nature. That being said, I do really enjoy the discussion and research involved with coming up with an answer.

For kicks I looked up mariae and bastiani in my Christenson Phal. Monograph. These species are very closely related, so can be difficult to distinguish. Christenson seems to emphasize 3 features to differentiate:

1. Mariae has pendant inflorescences, whereas bastiani inflorescences are erect.
2. Mariae has a more dense tuft of trichomes on the lip ("hairy lip"), whereas bastiani's trichomes are less dense and more scattered.
3. The flower segements (petals/sepals) on mariae tend to have curled margins (kind of like drinking straws), whereas the segments on bastiani tend to be flatter. Note, this refers to segments, not cupped or not form of the entire flower.

I would encourage everyone to do their own research and keep an objective and open mind to the possibility that what you have may not be what is on the tag. Goodness knows we have all probably been there, I know I have.

Susan

[goodgollymissmolly]

You're right Sue and the only way for all of us to progress is to discuss what we see even if it means that someone might not have what they thought they had. I believe I'm the leader in that category.

I have never been able to see Christenson's third point. Even in his own book the petals and sepals are not "rolled" along the longitudinal axis. Frowine shows a pic that looks the same as Christenson's and in the 4th Qtr 2008 Phalaenopsis magazine, Tom Harper shows pictures and gives some different indicators from Christenson. Not in conflict, just different points. His picture also shows no "straw" look.

Harper does show a complete bastianii plant that has inflorescences growing straight up..no bending whatsoever. It looks like a doritis inflorescence. I got a piece of that plant and the flowers are dead flat.

Harper also notes that mariae inflorescences grow horizonally across the pot and become pendant off the edge. He shows pictures of the lip with thick hair on the bastianii and very little (but some) on the mariae.Every mariae picture that I've ever seen has very cupped petals...not slight...very forward.

I think the problem is that so many of the sale plants are crosses of the two that we can find characteristics that we like and defend our plant with those. When you look at Harper's article the two plants are very different including the foliage which he describes for each.

I'm confident that I have a bastianii from Tom. I'm still looking for a mariae that I believe in.

As other conflicts, I submit sumatrana/inscriptiosinensis and floresensis/micholitzii hybrids with floresensis.

[OrchidSue]

I totally agree. Things can be so variable regarding flower form, that I find it difficult to use form alone to determine conclusively that a given plant is a certain species in some cases. Then, of course, the possibility of hybridization confuses things further. From other discussions I have participated in, the most consistent thing seems to be the spike being pendant in the case of mariae and more erect for bastiani. My bastiani looks like it has a spike coming. I look forward to trying to verify that it is indeed bastiani .

Susan