a horribly ambitious and terribly long project

[gravotrope]

I am thinking in terms longer than any of us would ever be alive to see, and I perceive two threats, though, sadly, neither are snakes. I have no data of their decline other than the fragility of their habitat combined with their high level of specialization.

The example of the Dendrobiums is great, because it shows how people are ultimately not stewards of the environment regardless of what billions of other people may be trying to do. That is what I'm operating with, and projecting that chaotic destruction right or wrong down the road hundreds of years inspires me to do something.

[orchidsarefun]

your thinking is admirable. I am just suggesting that you focus on increasing the existing supply, and genetic pool, by propagating them - rather than by creating a primary hybrid which may or may not be possible. By all means do both !

[Orchid Whisperer]

Let's be clear here. Yes, the idea that Burmese pythons will in any way contribute to a hypothetical extinction of D. lindenii is a complete absurdity. This is not an imaginative concept (anymore than the idea that I might suddenly sprout antlers); it is just an absurdity. Please find any scientific, peer-reviewed ecological research article that supports the theory that any snake, in any part of the world, has caused a threat to the survival of any wild orchid species and I'd be willing to reconsider.

Your idea is not half conservation, half bio-art (whatever the heck bio-art may be). This has ZERO to do with conservation. Zero. Zip. Nada.

You are proposing to create a man-made hybrid (by definition, artificial = made or produced by human beings rather than occurring naturally; no plastic required). This is fine as a domesticated plant (your recent posts indicate that you have no intention to release it into the wild, which is good, but then you keep coming back to "conservation", which keeps me concerned that releasing is still on your mind (?)).

There is nothing illegal about making a hybrid. Feel free to hybridize at will - have at it! Acquire the orchids you want to hybridize, grow them to flowering size, make your hybrid, and see if anything germinates. If so, raise the resulting seedlings to flowering size. You can germinate seeds at home for under $100 (possibly significantly less than $100). Millions of dollars for genetic research is not required. Be aware that even if you succeed on your first try, you are looking at a span of about 10 years from germination to an adult plant. This does not include the learning curve needed to grow D. lindenii successfully - they are notoriously difficult. As isurus79 has said, let us know how it goes.

[orchidsarefun]

pythons are a predator in larger numbers, at the top of the food chain. It's possible that another "predator" lower down has its food source displaced and has turned to a new food source........the pollinators of the orchid. Result = fewer seed pods. Maybe an insect that fed on fungus is now being consumed itself, and that fungus is now killing off the orchid in greater numbers.

The above scenarios are probably unlikely, but its a bit harsh to use the word absurd. Stranger things have happened. A good example is the cane toad in Australia which is now an absolute menace.
102 toads in 1935 are now over 200 million.....and they have adapted in a short period of time

from Wiki
The toads on the western frontier of their advance have evolved larger legs;[7] this is thought to be related to their ability to travel farther. As a consequence of their longer legs, larger bodies, and faster movement, about 10% of the leading edge cane toads have also developed arthritis.[8] It is estimated that cane toads migrate at an average of 40 kilometres (25 mi) per year currently.[9]

[Orchid Whisperer]

Orchidsarefun, I get your point, (e.g "butterfly effect"), but there is no proof that any such effect is occurring due to snakes.

To embark on such a project to address a problem that has not been documented as even existing does not seem reasonable.

Far better to preserve habitat or address orchid conservation through experienced conservation organizations, mentioned in earlier posts, or easily found on the internet.

[epiphyte78]

The other day my hummingbird tried to cross my bougainvillea with my geranium. The other day I tried to cross my Psychilis krugii with my Sophronitis brevipedunculata*.

The hummingbird and I are having a competition to see who can create the best crosses. He's probably winning by virtue of creating far more crosses than I do. Sure, I can cross more things than he can...but he's got the heart of a champion...while I have the heart of a dreamer. Plus, he's not limited by minor details such as walls, fences, other people's property...

So if a tree Aloe starts naturalizing here in Southern California...chances are good that the hummingbird can take all the credit...errr...blame. Same thing with Tillandsias. And Echeverias...and Aeoniums.

If an Aeonium naturalizes...sure...it would compete with the natives. Would it compete our Dudleyas out of existence?

We definitely wouldn't have to worry about a Tillandsia competing the natives out of existence. We have perhaps one native epiphyte...a fern...but I don't think a fern would be completely beat by a Tillandsia.

Should Southern California have only one epiphyte in the wild? Is that the argument that some are making? I think we should have 100 different epiphytes completely naturalized here. Naw, who am I kidding? I wish there was an infinite variety of epiphytes growing on the trees here.

Not just here of course...but everywhere. I want to climb our mountains and see Tillandsias and orchids growing on Methuselah trees. I want to fly to Arizona and see Tillandsias and orchids growing on Saguaros. And when I fly to Florida I want to be amazed by the diversity of epiphytes on all the trees. When I'm driving anywhere I should strongly desire to stop the car every 10 feet because I know that I'll be dumbstruck by the variety of epiphytes growing on any tree. I guess I'd just have to walk everywhere. It would probably take me forever to go anywhere because every 10 feet I'd look up and say "woah" and use my Google Glasses Go to share the 10 minute video on my facebook page where billions of my followers would all say "woah". Heathens would wonder what all the "woahing" was about.

How's the argument go? We have enough species of epiphytic orchids in Florida? Or is the argument that Southern Florida should have more species than Northern Florida? Or is the argument that the population size of each species is perfect? Maybe the argument is that the perfect amount of trees in Florida have the perfect amount of Encyclia tampensis?

Heaven forbid Encyclia tampensis end up in Georgia...right? I went to infantry boot camp there...Ft. Benning. I remember eating a wild persimmon before it was ripe enough. I was always hungry in bootcamp.

So there I would have been...my stomach grumbling...I see a tree with persimmons. As I grab a persimmon I spot an Encyclia tampensis blooming on the branch. *woah* Good thing that never happened.

Good thing it only happened once when I was stationed in Panama. There we were...struggling, slipping, sliding single file through the dense jungle. Each of us carrying around 100 pounds...sweat dripping...wait a minute vines...black palm spines...crazy caterpillars... and then just one time...right in front of me was an orchid in bloom on a tree. *woah* I turned to my buddy behind me, pointed at the orchid and said "woah". For some reason he wasn't dumbstruck. It wasn't magical for him. The jungle wasn't transformed into a cathedral where the holy of most holies could burn his eyes. He didn't realize he was suddenly in the presence of the sacred. What a heathen.

What orchid was it? That's a good question because...some orchids are more magical than others? How unmagical would it have been if the orchid had been Sobennikoffia robusta? Maybe at least -100 on the magic scale. The thousands and thousands of trees I passed without a single orchid on them were far more magical. The first thing that would have popped into my head was my grandfather saying, "a place for everything and everything in its place".

Me: Hey you! You're in the wrong place!
Robusta: What's wrong with this place?
Me: Clearly it's not Madagascar
Robusta: So? I'm an epiphyte, my place is on a tree. This is a tree so this is my place.
Me: But you're crowding out the native orchids.
Robusta: *looks around* You think there's a long line for this real estate?

Oh, now I really want to cross Sobennikoffia robusta with Dendrophylax funalis. If I lived in Florida and did the cross...then heaven forbid the horror show should escape into the wild. Sobenniphylax would take all of Dendrophylax lindenii's real estate. Even worse if they crossed? Heaven forbid I artificially create a fitter monopodial orchid that spread like soft butter over warm bread. Eh?

The 11th commandment...

Thou shalt not create a fitter monopodial orchid.

God works in mysterious ways? So does my hummingbird. I really don't think he's all there though.

If we care about the continued existence of monopodial orchids...shouldn't we be striving to create fitter ones? Survival depends on fitness and fitness depends on the combination of "inputs". Therefore we limit fitness by limiting possible input combinations.

Limiting input combinations is putting too many eggs in the same basket. It's making the argument that a certain combination of inputs provides sufficient fitness. No, there are always better combinations of inputs. This is because the earth is always getting hotter, colder, drier, wetter...it's always changing. If we want more, rather than less, orchids in the future...given that we don't have a crystal ball...it would behoove us to hedge our bets.

Maybe the future will be too dry and hot for Dendrophylax funalis, Dendrophylax lindenii and Sobennikoffia robusta...but just right for Sobenniphylax? Nobody can know now whether this is true. But we can know that we decrease our chances of success by limiting the combination of inputs.

Imagine a tree with many different epiphytes. It's swarming with many different pollinators. Each one conducting countless crazy crosses. Now imagine a myriad of these trees/laboratories. This is how we hedge our bets. This is how we try and ensure that the future is as magical as possible.

So please cross lindenii with...

Aerangis somalensis
Angraecum erectum
Campylocentrum
Chiloschista
Cleisostoma
Cyrtorchis
Gastrochilus formosanus
Jumellea
Microcoelia
Neofinetia falcata
Papilionanthe teres
Pelatantheria insectifera
Phalaenopsis taenialis
Plectorrhiza tridentata
Rangaeris
Renanthera imschootiana
Rhynchostylis retusa
Sarcochilus
Sobennikoffia
Vanda coerulea/tricolor

Attach the crosses to your trees and let's learn which combination of inputs creates the fittest individual. Whichever one makes it to Ft. Benning first is the winner. Whichever orchid distracts hungry/tired soldiers the longest is the winner. Whichever orchid creates the most magic is the winner.

*doesn't taste like an enchilada...and Selaginella doesn't smell like Vanilla

[gravotrope]

How likely or unlikely damage by any animal may be, it isn't the point. I appreciate what everyone brings to the discussion, but I must add that these are two species that have never shared a habitat before, and though there really haven't been any studies about the Burmese python's impact on flora, there are a few about its impact on fauna. Even if those studies are wrong, since it's hard to account for the effect of the 2010 cold snap, a point can still be made that the full impact of the python species is unknown and although the burden of proof of damage is on me there is a way around actually having to get it.

I'm more interested in so using the existence of the python problem as proof that we've completely changed the habitat in a lot of different ways, and according to a 2013 study by the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, there could be a 46 foot rise in sealevel by 2300. Even at 1/4 this rise, the habitat would be completely destroyed, making any potential harm done by animals pretty much pointless as of somewhere between 50 and 200 years from today.

The point so far as conservation has developed into a twofold scenario, one that having a more adaptable and faster growing cold tolerant intergeneric sister to potentially breed with (after the local extinction of lindenii) would not be a bad thing for the future swamps of northern Florida/south Georgia, and that also such a captivating species becoming more available before lindenii's extirpation (along with most of Florida) would draw attention to a broad range of ecological issues.

I am seeing selective breeding and 'intergeneric enhancements' as preferable to Genetically Modifying these plants in a lab, and though that point is certainly debatable...it is less expensive.

The breeding program will be shared as it is developed further and as plants are obtained.

[Jayfar]

Epiphyte78,

I think I might disagree with your basic premise, but I thoroughly enjoyed the essay. Doesn't the 'Prime Directive,' or a corollary, come into play here?

Prime Directive - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This directive can be found in the Articles of the Federation, Chapter I, Article II, Paragraph VII, which states:
“ Nothing within these Articles Of Federation shall authorize the United Federation of Planets to intervene in matters which are essentially the domestic jurisdiction of any planetary social system, or shall require the members to submit such matters to settlement under these Articles Of Federation. But this principle shall not prejudice the application of enforcement measures under Chapter VII. ”

It has been further defined in this way:
“ As the right of each sentient species to live in accordance with its normal cultural evolution is considered sacred, no Star Fleet personnel may interfere with the normal and healthy development of alien life and culture. Such interference includes introducing superior knowledge, strength, or technology to a world whose society is incapable of handling such advantages wisely. Star Fleet personnel may not violate this Prime Directive, even to save their lives and/or their ship, unless they are acting to right an earlier violation or an accidental contamination of said culture. This directive takes precedence over any and all other considerations, and carries with it the highest moral obligation. ”

In other words, the Federation cannot expose an evolving species to technology that the species has not yet discovered or is currently capable of developing.

[AnonYMouse]

Originally Posted by ovanoshio

I am seeing selective breeding and 'intergeneric enhancements' as preferable to Genetically Modifying these plants in a lab, and though that point is certainly debatable...it is less expensive.

I prefer natural selection over selective breeding. Human's have impact on climate change (I don't want to debate that here) but climate change does occur without our help (ice ages). Species evolve or parish. This planet was never static.

Edited to ask: what were the possible environmental pressures that made the lindenii and other leafless plants evolve this why?

[gravotrope]

Natural selection is beautiful. The prime directive reference is interesting as well. I see it as we have already collectively interfered with its habitat and destroyed the concept of a "normal cultural evolution" as it applies to these specific plants.

Asking about the way they evolved to have no leaves is an excellent question, and it brings me to one of the main points of this project. But first, the question. I can only answer in 3 possibilities, but feel free to add your own ideas:

A plant with no leaves would be less affected by strong winds.

Another reason why a plant would lose its leaves is to make it less attractive to insects with biting/chewing mouthparts like caterpillars and grasshoppers.

A third reason could be too much inbreeding, and then that being advantageous for one or both of the other two reasons.

So now one of the main points is that an insect lifecycle progresses (in general) a lot faster than any orchid lifecycle, and though the natural pollinator sphinx moths stand a far greater chance at shifting their habitat and surviving (they may already have a range far to the north)...the orchids that depend on them would be several orders of magnitude slower to the changes of natural selection.

Since the speed at which the environment is changing is caused by people and industry, it's almost like natural selection has taken a backseat to human influence already