Does anyone know of a site that has a comprehensive and up to date listing?
I can't find one. Paphs.net doesn't seem to have everything up to date, Paphiopedia is alphabetical, and I'm working on my database don't have Lance's book at work w/ me.

Also, are there really only four Brachy species? Why did I think there were more??

umm... Antec? Or are they out of date?
http://ladyslipper.com/ppfiles.htm

phil's orchid world, paphs....
http://www.angelfire.com/or3/orchidsnz/paphframe/paphframe.html

Hmmm, they're all a little off.
Phil's got tigrinum in with the Polyanthas - (lowii, haynaldianum, etc.)
I don't think that's right. However, his lists are more up to date than others I've been finding.

Grrr....should have brought book.

Thanks though....

Will the database you are working on be available for the forum users (i.e after you've completed it)?
Mang

This site has good list of species in groups, but I would disagree with their overall classification:

http://www.mendelu.cz/arboretum/orchids/taxonomy.html

It does not follow molecular phylogenetic results and the principle of monophyly (= unique origin of a lineage). See http://www.rbgkew.org.uk/ibis/slipper_taxonomy/slipper.html for a relevant phylogenetic tree.

I support:

Subgenus Parvisepalum Karasawa & Saito (or Section Parvisepalum (Karasawa & Saito) Cribb)
Subgenus Brachypetalum Hallier ex Pfitzer (or Section Concoloria (Kraenzlin) V. A. Albert & Borge Pettersson)
Subgenus Paphiopedilum (or Section Paphiopedilum)
--Section Coryopedilum Pfitzer (contains parishii and haynaldianum and relatives, so no Sections Polyantha, Mystropetalum, or Mastigopetalum possible)
--Section Cochlopetalum Hallier ex Pfitzer
--Section Barbata V. A. Albert & Borge Pettersson

Note that Parvisepalum, Brachypetalum, and Paphiopedilum can all become Sections (though Brachypetalum has to become Concoloria for correct nomenclature), thereby making ALL Paph groups monophyletic Sections -- i.e., having equal rank.

Best from Besk

Hey, I've got Braem's 2003 list posted here:
http://paphfacts.maclenet.com/bctaxa.html

There are some others up and listed here:
http://paphfacts.maclenet.com/

--Stephen

I'm not sure. I think there are capabilities for doing so, but right now I'm still learning.
I'm having some issues because I used a template instead of designing from scratch (because I haven't ever used the program before.) However, switching back and forth constantly between Excel and Filemaker Pro is a major headache, especially when new plants arrive. . So, I decided to get all the Excel data moved over, and then worry about whether I need to start to design something from scratch. I figure importing/exporting from Filemaker database to Filemaker database is going to be easier than dealing w/ excel, which I just want to be DONE with.

Anyway, if I can get it to work for me, and it is possible to share it eventually, I would be happy to.

I guess my next questions is what is the current thinking on which Taxonomist to go by...at the moment, I'm going w/ Cribb...it's very confusing!

Oops, edit - I was typing while everyone else was, apparently.

Stephen - yep, I remembered about you shoir been to your site today, thanks!

Besk - oh, that is a good listing, but I agree with you, at the moment. :wink:

Thanks Paphgirl for your reply. It's a helluva job! I'd only dream of doing it & find whatever excuse to put it off for the next free time! My best regards.
Mang

I support:

Subgenus Parvisepalum Karasawa & Saito (or Section Parvisepalum (Karasawa & Saito) Cribb)
Subgenus Brachypetalum Hallier ex Pfitzer (or Section Concoloria (Kraenzlin) V. A. Albert & Borge Pettersson)
Subgenus Paphiopedilum (or Section Paphiopedilum)
--Section Coryopedilum Pfitzer (contains parishii and haynaldianum and relatives, so no Sections Polyantha, Mystropetalum, or Mastigopetalum possible)
--Section Cochlopetalum Hallier ex Pfitzer
--Section Barbata V. A. Albert & Borge Pettersson



Note a minor error -- if Subgenus Paphiopedilum (which in one of my classifications includes Sections Coryopedilum, Cochlopetalum, and Barbata) is instead relegated to section, then Section Paphiopedilum (type = insigne) has to be added as an automatic Section.

Also, the species list at the link I gave you is not entirely up to date -- for example, conco-bellatulum, a hybrid name, has been validly descried as the species wenshanense.

If you really want ALL validly published names for Paphs, go to http://www.ipni.org/ipni/query_ipni.html and type in Paphiopedilum under 'genus name' (check off only 'IK' under 'extended options'). You'll get a monster list, but note that MANY names can readily be considered as later NOMENCLATURAL synonyms of others. Or as TAXONOMIC synonyms, depending on who you ask....

Best from Besk

Thanks Paphgirl for your reply. It's a helluva job! I'd only dream of doing it & find whatever excuse to put it off for the next free time! My best regards.
Mang

It is a good thing to me to work on in my spare time. I'm super anal though, and I tend to get carried away with things like this. I'm even making little photographic animations of all of my plants, chronologically.
(The taxonomic issues irk me, though.)

If you really want ALL validly published names for Paphs, go to http://www.ipni.org/ipni/query_ipni.html and type in Paphiopedilum under 'genus name' (check off only 'IK' under 'extended options'). You'll get a monster list, but note that MANY names can readily be considered as later NOMENCLATURAL synonyms of others. Or as TAXONOMIC synonyms, depending on who you ask....

Best from Besk

Thank you!

"I'm even making little photographic animations of all of my plants, chronologically.
(The taxonomic issues irk me, though.)"

I like the lowii animation you posted.
Yea, the taxonomy thing does get me mad too! Imagine, we are in the 21st century & we still have lots of issues to iron out.... Perhaps them SLIPPER BIG GUNS should shed off their egos once in a while!!
Mang

I really enjoy the taxonomic discussions, but the genetics is a bit over my head, so I have a hard time knowing what to go by. Still just in the learning stages. :)

Paphgirl, I have a database carried out by my for the clasificacion of all my plants. I am interested in exchanging our files of the database with FileMaker 5 For Is possible in this forum? ???

Pere,
Are you saying your database is in Filemaker Pro 5? I am using Version 7. I am not comfortable enough yet to share my database, but I'd love to see what your's is like and if you wish I can PM you my email. I'm not sure how we'd share it over the forum.

Sorry if I am not understanding quite correctly! :)

I'm sooo confused. All I have done is to put my plants onto an excel spreadsheet. Meanwhile, I have photos of my plants in a different file. The Excel file only has basic info, like when I bought it, the species or hybrid name (for Paphs) where I bought it, what I paid, and the size of the plant. I would love to get it into some sort of database, so I can add narrative about newl leaves, blooming, etc.

I know it can be done, but I am so lazy. Someone on ebay does sell a program that will do this, as well as let you integrate photos to the database. It might be worth it.

Dusty, it's just an easier way of keeping an individual diary for all of your plants. Some of us like more knowledge than others (anal :) ) and some of us just wouldn't mind knowing what plants they already have so they don't go out and buy more of the same (ahem :embarass: ).

The "desire" to learn things like scientific names, synonym, common names etc all comes with time in my experience. The biggest hurdle is keeping them alive. The greatest joy is flowering them. All else is window dressing.

Cheers
Stephan

I'm just anal!
Sorry!

BTW - Susan, you CAN insert pics into Excel if you wish.
Just a hassle if you ask me.
My excel file just got so big, I cannot print it, and it takes like five minutes to save it. It is a mess!

I have officially stopped noting new leaves. Except on things like sanderianum, where it really counts!

I guess I'm half anal-retentive and half just plain old lazy. Stephen, I probably just need the list to remind me of what I have, so I don't go off and buy more of the same kind. :shock: I just think it would be nice to integrate photos of the plants with the basic info I have about them.

I recall Marcus saying that he had a database system that worked well for him.

perhaps the list at slipperorchid.org?

I've got version 3 of Cattleya-Log, which I installed in my old computer. I had a chance to work with it before my computer crashed and burned. I haven't reinstalled it on my new 'pute yet. From what I saw, it seemed like a good program for tracking a standard mature collection. It even provided a link to pictures in other files, thus avoiding the slow load time caused by too many pictures. Anyone else have comments on this program other than its lousy name?

Sorry Susan, I forgot to reply.

I use My Orchids 2.0 from www.orchidtalk.com
Free to download and try - the first 15 plants are free.

I liked the look of Cattleya log enough to contact the writer/owner about a macintosh version, to no avail. Unfortunate. Would have been a lot easier to just pay someone else to write it.

I'm also working on getting Wildcatt running on VPC. If I can at least do an effective search and save it as a pdf. I'll be thrilled!