Does anyone know whether "Paph. liltii" has been validly published based on P. primulinum var. purpuracens? I have seen liltii used on the web, but don't see it in www.ipni.org. I do agree that the plant is different enough from standard primulinum to deserve its own species name. We really have a lot of inconsistency out there in terms of species concepts. Anyone who might call P. jackii as a var. of malipoense and then consider wardii a hybrid and topperi as distinct from kolopakingii has some screws loose, in my opinion. But then again, few have taken up some of my opinions!

Best from Besk

The name 'Paph. liltii' is only a name, but no species was ever decribed under this name.

Some of these so named plants you can find on the following page
http://www.cichlidrecipe.com/orchids/gallery_stud_plants.asp
Matt Pedersen wrote on this site that Paph. liltii is perhaps a synonym of Paph. primulinum forma purpurascens.
It is really difficult to decide on the base of these pectures if it is something new.
For this time it is not good to use this undefined name for a plant how it was made by the awarding of the East Everglade Orchid Society.

Best greetings

Olaf

I think this is just a trade name, and it is what the plant below was listed as when purchased from RJ Rands many years ago. I am not so sure it is primulinum v. purpurascens, as to me it looks like the "typical" alba crossed with the variety purpurascens.

http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a218/jonbar2/lilt.jpg

Jon

Here is a photo of my primulinum var. liltii, as the tag said:
http://www.slipperorchids.info/paphspecies/Paphprimulinum(fma)purpurascens3.jpg

Hmm -- for some reason, when I posted this, the whole URL didn't become active. But you can copy/paste it and it should come in. It's on Stephen's site.

We also bought a couple "Paph. liltii" from Rands years ago, and they bloomed out to be P. primulinum fma purpurascens. I believe that the (album x pupurascens) theory to make "liltii" may actually be correct, since 25 % of the off-spring from a selfing of our "liltii" turned out to be the album form of P. primulinum.

Best,

Tom

Thanks for the feedback -- but the question remains as to whether or not primulinum v. purpurascens should be a species in its own right separate from green-yellow primulinum. Any arguments?

Hi Besk,

IMHO, I think that because the only difference I can see between the album and purpurascens form is color, it should be correctly called Paph. primulinum fma purpurascens.

Thanks,

Tom

I agree with Tom, they are the same species with a different degree of albanism. The purpurascens variety is definitely a diluted color from the original root species and the alba is total diluted. Perhaps a better question is what specie is the ancestor of both primulinum varieties? Other than color the only difference is that the purpurascens var is slightly larger in general.

I agree with purpurascens as a form of primulinum. The albino of this species was described first so it is the 'normal' form. The colored form is the 'fma' form. This is the opposite of all the other colored/albino pairs in the genus.

From R.J. Rands ad in the AOS Bulletin, September 1994, p. 1065:
"P. primulinum ssp. liltii (Not Described). Being slightly conservative we're listing this new species as a sub-species of primulium, but we feel it is totally new. This was flowered in from a section of P. liemianum about 5 years ago... We selfed it, reproduced it, and this can now be a handsome addition to your Paph. collection. Dorsal, bluish-green, petals, white, barred in brownish-red.. pouch, a weird glowing orange-tan color. It is successive flowering almost forever ... 3 great seedlings per pot, $22." (ellipses and punctuation exactly as in ad)

--Stephen