http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y7/jonbar1/DSC04663.jpg
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y7/jonbar1/DSC04664.jpg

Here's my Phrag. richteri in bloom today. The first spike still has two flowers...but the bottom one should fall in a day or two.
Jon

That's looking good!

Can you add some flower dimensions?

Yes, very nice! Mine is now getting quite large with many growths and may begin to spike again very soon. They can stay in bloom for as long as 12 or more months.

looks nice Jon, you will have to bring in some plants to the next meeting.

I say a phrag richteri at JEM Orchids today that was blooming on a 3-4" inflorescence. The flower was small, maybe 3" tall.
Can anyone tell me if this is this about the normal blooming size? I think the plant was in a 4" pot, and the leafspan was about 5".
FYI, JEM Orchids' liquidation sale is now a 30% discount for up to $1500. I think the website says less.

very nice looking!

I found out today mine is beginning to sheath. :-dance: Marcus, my richteri plant has many growths and I wouldn't call it small, maybe "medium" size and the flowers are bigger than 3" tall. It sounds like it was a mislablled plant, probably an ecuadorense. I know some are sold as richteri. :roll:

Congrats Peter! :h-dance:

Cool mine is happily growing to get bigger! It is a wee little guy! So what was your damage today Marcus?

It sounds like it was a mislablled plant, probably an ecuadorense. I know some are sold as richteri.

Dear Paphphragguy,
this is the problem with Phrag. richteri. You can find this species in trade as Phrag. amazonica, Phrag. peruviana, Phrag. ecuadorense, Phrag. topperi and also as Phrag. ecuadorense.
So also many crosses were made with these plants. Especially you can find many ecuadorense crosses which are in truth crosses with Phrag. richteri.

Phrag. ecuadorense is a synonym of Phrag. pearcei, nothing more.

With best greetings from Bavaria

Olaf

It sounds like it was a mislablled plant, probably an ecuadorense. I know some are sold as richteri. :roll:

I think you guys are right. I shoud have been more specific. It was labeled Phrag. richteri var, ecuadorense. It was next to some others that were labeled Phrag. richteri var. peruviana.

TADD - I figured I had to drive by JEM on the way back home tomorrow, so I am holding out for whatever I can find from Ratcliffe first.

(this would be my dumb question of the day)

So, Olaf, how do we know what we have? Are certain named plants (such as Phrag. ecuadorense 'Birchwood' AM/AOS) known to be one or the other? Or is there just no way at this point to be able to tell?

Thanks!

Nope, I have both richteri and ecuadorense and they are totally different plants/species, richteri a little larger in size both plant wise and flower wise and the flowers are totally different as well. All this confusion comes from the naming and renaming of plants over the years. :roll: I agree ecuadorense and pearcei are probably the same species, they look the same to me anyway to my eyes. :lol: So, Marcus what you saw was an ecuadorense which I had already suspected and not a true richteri. Check out my richteri photo in the gallery.

Dear Paphgirl.,
the first step for the analyze are the leaves. Phrag. richteri has leaves which are the double of Phrag. pearcei in length. The inflorescence can be 50 cm to 2 meters and is very often branched. The plant can bring flowers on the same inflorescence more than one year, one flower after the other.
The flowers are similar, but bigger and differs also in the staminode.
You can find in the article in 'The Orchid Digest' Vol 67 (4) many pictures of both species.

Sometimes it was told that Phrag. richteri is a natural hybrid but I all clones which I have seen (around 200) have the same shape and nearly the same colour.

With best greetings

Olaf

I have to agree with Pete.

Welcome Olaf!
I have a (pearcei x boissierianum) that is nearly identical with richteri, though I agree richteri is very stable and worthy of species status. Thanks for your comments.

Jon

It sounds like it was a mislablled plant, probably an ecuadorense. I know some are sold as richteri.

Dear Paphphragguy,
this is the problem with Phrag. richteri. You can find this species in trade as Phrag. amazonica, Phrag. peruviana, Phrag. ecuadorense, Phrag. topperi and also as Phrag. ecuadorense.
So also many crosses were made with these plants. Especially you can find many ecuadorense crosses which are in truth crosses with Phrag. richteri.

Phrag. ecuadorense is a synonym of Phrag. pearcei, nothing more.

With best greetings from Bavaria

Olaf

I've done some minor research in it today and I can totally understand the confusion. I'm convinced P. ecuadorense is indeed P. pearcei var ecuadorense but the P. ricteri definitely has a difference. There's been question of whether P. richteri is a natural hybrid or not but there's a short synopsis of history on http://phragweb.info/phragmipedium/species/display_species_phrag.asp?phrag_id=251 as well as pictures on the links.

Here is a photo of my ecuadorense and richteri side by side, the larger one on the right is richteri.
http://mysite.verizon.net/vze6o1l1/re.jpg

Great comparison there Pete! Looks like you need to reseal the driveway :poke: I will work for plants...