Hi all,

Any help on id would be greatly apprieciated. Bought this as a one growth wonder about 2 and a half years ago and finally got it to flower. So here is my first official Phrag flowering.

http://au.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/layciarose/detail?.dir=b6df&.dnm=6668.jpg&.src=ph


Thanks for looking.

I would put my money on Phrag. Sedenii (schlimii x longifolium). There is a chance it is a more complex hybrid, but schlimii and longifolium are definitely the majority of the parentage. If you know the history of where the plant came from it might help since if it's a division of an old plant it is more likely a primary cross. Hope this helps.

BTW, congrats on your first phrag flowering :D

Jon

Nice call Jon, I would have no idea. Very nice flowering baby*bear*21!

I would tend to go with Jon on this - looks like a Sed to me also.

i have no clue but very nice flower!

I would tend to go with Jon on this - looks like a Sed to me also.

I'll have to vote against the both of you. Doesn't look like Sedenii (other than the coloration) to me. Petals are too thin.

This is a photo I 'borrowed' off the internet of Sedenii "Blush" (the most common clone)
http://ca.geocities.com/blackdragonorchids@rogers.com/Sed_Blush.jpg.thmb.jpg

There is a long and involved story about how the original Sedenii couldn't actually be Sedenii. And, it was remade recently with the reputed parents (longifolium x schlimii), and it doesn't look much like "Blush". It should look like your picture. So perhaps you have one of those.

I'd argue good money that your plant has schlimii and longifolium in it. But it also has something else. Could be Sedenii x longifolium (P. Calurum). Or almost anything, really.

I don't know but it looks nice :clap2:

I must admit it does look an awful lot like Calurum. Unfortunately being a pink hybrid Phrag doesn't narrow it down a whole lot. Schilimii getting confused with Cardinale all those years ago, making Sedenii 'Blush' more likely Phrag. Eva doesn't help things either.

Jon

I must admit it does look an awful lot like Calurum. Unfortunately being a pink hybrid Phrag doesn't narrow it down a whole lot. Schilimii getting confused with Cardinale all those years ago, making Sedenii 'Blush' more likely Phrag. Eva doesn't help things either.

Jon

If you believe Guido Braem, when Sedenii was first made, it couldn't have been made with schlimii (can't quite remember why). I can't remember if he published this (I think it was in the AOS Bulletin maybe 10 years ago?), but I distinctly remember polishing off a few bottles of red wine and discussing it with him one night. Hence, I might be remembering it wrong... Of course that creates a bit of a mystery. Whatever was the original parent of Sedenii would have to have been a species we haven't seen since... Hmmm...

This is why it was so interesting when Sedenii was remade with an actual schlimii and it turned out not to look much like "Sedenii" (whatever that is). And of course any hybrid made with 'schlimii' might just as well be a hybrid made with Sedenii, since so many Sedenii (or Cardinale, or...) were mislabelled schlimii (ie, schlimii "Birchwood" and schlimii "Wilcox"). That whole group is a big mess...

I would tend to go with Jon on this - looks like a Sed to me also.

I'll have to vote against the both of you. Doesn't look like Sedenii (other than the coloration) to me. Petals are too thin.

Okay, I would tend to go with Rob on this....:D

You are right the whole group IS a mess and if I had actually had time to look it all up, I probably wouldn't have said what I did (sorry Jon!) Teach me to do my research before I post. My bad, sorry!

Although a bit controversal lately, Guido is a great guy to talk slippers with. A few years back I was lucky enough to get to talk with him and Glen Lehr when our society had a "slipper symposium" with these two and Jerry Fischer as guest speakers. Most of our conversation was about Guido's choice and reasoning for keeping Cyp. arietinum and plectrochilum in the genus Criosanthes and the Phrags like kaieterum/lindlyanum/sargentianum being better put in complexes instead of being species and lastly about making Paph. kalinae a valid species. I wish this would have come up as a topic, I had only heard the theory with Cardinale. I wonder if anyone's seen pics of fischeri x longifolium or if, even better, there is another "new" species out there to be found. Thanks for sharing!

Sorry Heather, I didn't look at pics of Sedenii either, I just looked at the pouch and color and guessed...darn pink phrags.

Jon

Great! I am not the only one being lazy today! :poke: Just kidding Jon, of course!

I just looked up Schroderae, but I don't think that's it either. I do know there is a lot of confusion out there for some reason between Sedenii and Schroderae. Also, it always surprises me when people who grow "schlimii" 'Wilcox' or 'Birchwood' continue to refer to them as schlimii - I think it is really obviously not a schlimii! :confused:

Although a bit controversal lately, Guido is a great guy to talk slippers with. A few years back I was lucky enough to get to talk with him and Glen Lehr when our society had a "slipper symposium" with these two and Jerry Fischer as guest speakers. Most of our conversation was about Guido's choice and reasoning for keeping Cyp. arietinum and plectrochilum in the genus Criosanthes and the Phrags like kaieterum/lindlyanum/sargentianum being better put in complexes instead of being species and lastly about making Paph. kalinae a valid species. I wish this would have come up as a topic, I had only heard the theory with Cardinale. I wonder if anyone's seen pics of fischeri x longifolium or if, even better, there is another "new" species out there to be found. Thanks for sharing!

Jon

Controversial lately? He is controversial all the time!

I actually think kaieturum/lindlyanum/sargentianum are all one species... I don't agree with Guido's concept of 'complexes'. At least not as he had it in his last paph book. Hybrid swarms, maybe. Anyway, those three species may (may...) be varieties of one species. Probably caught in the act of speciation. But in my humble, non-taxonomists, opinion, they shouldn't be each a separate species. Maybe in a few thousand years.

There are a few new phrag species to be found. Supposedly there is a newer one than kovachii that is white. That is all I know about it though.

He was saying they were all the same species in his eye, as are czerwiakowianum/reticulatum/boissierianum...I tend to agree.

I liked the idea of complexes and taxa, because when he described it, he meant that they don't warrent species or varietal status...but have been referred to as species by other authors. I am so glad I didn't persue taxonomy as a profession...I would have pulled all my hair out years ago.

Jon

mmmmmm....taxonomy.....

:Yuck:

How subjective! :roll:

Thanks everyone for your input. Talking to a few other growers in the area we think that is probably Phrag. Calurum. Thanks all but if you want to follow the taxonomannny line of thought feel free. :-dance:

I'm with the vote for Calurum -- there are many of these older plants here in Aust . ----------Billie