# Variations in Phrag. Yelva Myhre



## Bjorn (Jul 7, 2015)

Approximately one year ago the cross of Rosalie Dixler and kovachii was registered as Phrag Yelva Myhre. This registration was based on flowering of seedlings coming from Alfredo Manrique in Lima in 2012 and produced this flower and 6 more in succession over a period of 3 months.



pic upload

As I had 3 plants, one other flowered as well, that had a totally different appearance which was hard to understand. We tried to figure out if there could be any mix-up in the production, but came to the conclusion that it was due to the use of a 4n mother plant (Rosalie Dixler) I like it though, but it is a bit wonky and seems not to produce more than a few flowers in succession. Seems to be a reliable bloomer though, this year with 3 flowers  This picture is taken a few days ago and in the background, the last out of the 3 Yelvas is blooming. A coming spike of the one from last year is also there. Note that this grex produces spikes that require no staking, very upright and stiff.



image hosting 30 mb

And here is a frontal view of the last Yelva, quite similar to the first one, but lesser shape IMO.



free photo hosting
To my knowledge this grex is rather rare, but available from Alfredo Manrique that has produced a new batch, this time from a 2n Rosalie Dixler I believe.


----------



## labskaus (Jul 7, 2015)

The first and third are quite nice and what I'd expect from the cross. For the second one, I support the mix-up theory. Petal attitude and the dorsal would suggest some caudatum influence in this flower. Not even the softest evidence for kovachii in that flower.


----------



## Bjorn (Jul 7, 2015)

labskaus said:


> The first and third are quite nice and what I'd expect from the cross. For the second one, I support the mix-up theory. Petal attitude and the dorsal would suggest some caudatum influence in this flower. Not even the softest evidence for kovachii in that flower.



Yes, Carsten that was my thinking as well. However, the plants are quite distinctive and the leaves are very similar. They look a bit like longifolium leaves. Alfredo claims it is impossible....strange indeed.


----------



## Erythrone (Jul 7, 2015)

Very stange.... Too much "caudatum-like" for the 2nd...


----------



## NYEric (Jul 7, 2015)

Bjorn said:


> image hosting 30 mb



How big is this bloom? If it is large enough to be a Pk hybrid then I would say it's probably identified correctly.


----------



## Drorchid (Jul 7, 2015)

It is possible that Alfredo made multiple crosses on that day, and may have used a toothpick that still had some residual pollen from a previous parent, so in one flask you got two different crosses...So the podparent was Rosalie Dixler for all 3 plants, but the pollen parent was kovachii for plant # 1 and #3 but some caudatum type hybrid or species for plant # 2...

Robert


----------



## John M (Jul 7, 2015)

They are all beautiful; but, there is NO WAY that all 3 have the same parents. Assuming the facts provided in this thread are true, plain and simply, Alfredo Manrique needs to "man-up" and admit that a mistake was made. It happens....even sometimes to the best growers. What is really at issue is how well/honestly do they deal with the mistake? There is no shame in admitting that a mistake was made; but, there is great shame in perpetuating something that is not true, simply to protect one's ego and sensibilities......or profits. By refusing to recognise and accept that a mistake had to have been made, Alfredo is forcing you to have an unnamed hybrid, for which you paid good money and expected it to be true to name, which it clearly is not. If Alfredo would admit that something went wrong, then he could check his records to see what other crosses he made that day. Perhaps you'd be lucky. He could find that there was only one other cross that this "oddball" flower could possibly be, considering the characteristics of the flowers he worked with that day. In this way, he'd be doing you a service by providing you with an accurate name. However, what he's doing instead, is choosing to abandon your interests (getting an accurate name for a clearly mislabelled plant), in favour of protecting his image as someone who could never make a simple mistake. To me, that's treating his customer with contempt and he's not showing you the respect you deserve as his paying customer. As Rob said, the issue could be as simple as the unfortunate pollen contamination of the toothpick used to make the cross. It's easy to do; yet, the consequences are everlasting. I say to Alfredo: "Smarten Up!"...and try to help your customer figure out the true identity of this long-petalled hybrid that he got from you and which is NOT Phrag. Yelva Myhre, as it should've been.


----------



## Drorchid (Jul 7, 2015)

Yes, even we have made some mistakes, and mistakes do happen; either when making the cross, in the lab, coming out of the lab, and when growing in the greenhouse..we are all human!

Btw, I am leaning most towards #2 being Phrag. (Rosalie Dixler x caudatum). This cross has not been registered yet, but it should look very similar to (Phrag. Mem. Dick Clements x caudatum) which is Phrag. Beaumont:

http://forum.theorchidsource.com/ubbthreads.php/topics/242719.html

Robert


----------



## SlipperFan (Jul 7, 2015)

Interesting thread.


----------



## gonewild (Jul 7, 2015)

Bjorn said:


> Yes, Carsten that was my thinking as well. However, the plants are quite distinctive and the leaves are very similar. They look a bit like longifolium leaves. Alfredo claims it is impossible....strange indeed.



What year did you get the plants from Alfredo?
Maybe he did not have any crosses made with caudatum at the time making it impossible? I may visit Alfredo next week, I'll ask him about it.


----------



## Bjorn (Jul 8, 2015)

John, I do not think its such a big issue, I have communicated with Alfredo about that and we do not know the exact reason for this mix-up. Both Alfredo and I agree that there has been some mix-up, probably as Robert suggests with traces of foreign pollen. And it does look like caudatum influence. The size of the flowers are close to 10 by 12 cm, exactly in the range that a kovachii could produce; but perhaps also caudatum. And for Lance, I got the plants in 2012, at that time perhaps 2-3years old seedlings. Pollination might have happened in 2008-9 then??? When you see Alfredo, send my regards.
As I said, the plants are very similar, with relatively stiff, wide leaves perhaps 5 by 45cm, keeled, light green, pigmented base not as fleshy as caudatum. Below is a picture of a plant, typical appearance. This one was the "real" Yelva, but as said, they are very similar. I will take some more Pictures later if the weather permits (its rainy here)



print screen windows


----------



## John M (Jul 8, 2015)

Bjorn said:


> Both Alfredo and I agree that there has been some mix-up, probably as Robert suggests with traces of foreign pollen.








Bjorn, I said what I did ONLY because of this post you made: 

"Quote:Originally Posted by labskaus 
_For the second one, I support the mix-up theory." _

Reply by Bjorn:
"Alfredo claims it is impossible....."

You seemed to be telling us that Alfredo says that a mistake by him is impossible. This is why in my reply I said: "Assuming the facts provided in this thread are true,...". What I said following that was hinged on the supposed "facts" that you provided. Now, you say that Alfredo has admitted that a mistake by him could be the case here...."Both Alfredo and I agree that there has been some mix-up, probably as Robert suggests with traces of foreign pollen."

Unfortunately, now you've changed the story from what you originally reported to us. That makes my comments out of context and less appropriate. So, which is it? Did Alfredo say that a mistake made by him is "impossible"; or, did he agree that he could have made a mistake? You've now reported that he said both.

In the end, it's good that you are not upset with having an mislabelled plant. After all, the whole point is to enjoy ourselves as we grow and flower our plants. 

However, please understand that my point was that I take issue with anyone who insists that it is "impossible" for them to make a mistake. Everybody makes mistakes. It's part of life. You did originally report that Alfredo claimed a mistake by him was "impossible". That comment reflected badly on Alfredo's character and reputation because it indicated that he was unwilling to help you figure out the correct name because, in his mind, it is "impossible" that he could have made a mistake.

Obviously, I have an issue with vendors that can't just be honest and humble enough to admit when something goes wrong (such as the mislabelling of a plant) and make an honest effort to try and correct the mistake. It's a matter of treating their customers with respect and regard and appreciation. If Alfredo has admitted to you and agreed that a mistake was probably made "with traces of foreign pollen", then my critisism of him was unjustified. However, you DID first report that Alfredo said it was "impossible", which is absolutely absurd and disrespectful because it implies that Alfredo assumes the customer is enough of a fool that they will believe he is not capable of ever making a mistake. 

My comment on your post was based on the information you originally provided us. .....And again, I did preceed my comments with: "Assuming the facts provided in this thread are true..."

Anyway; the flower in question is very beautiful and I do hope that you and Alfredo are able to figure out it's correct parentage. Good luck!


----------



## Bjorn (Jul 8, 2015)

Ok, ok, clumsy phrasing remember that English is not my mothertongue. I have checked up the old mails and found Alfredo said that mix up during replating was impossible. I never pursued that since I had three plants and one being an odd one did not bother me. Sorry for making a wrong impression, it was never intended:sob:
Btw just got another four of another batch from him


----------



## John M (Jul 8, 2015)

Bjorn said:


> Ok, ok, clumsy phrasing remember that English is not my mothertongue. I have checked up the old mails and found Alfredo said that mix up during replating was impossible. I never pursued that since I had three plants and one being an odd one did not bother me. Sorry for making a wrong impression, it was never intended:sob:
> Btw just got another four of another batch from him



Ah, well. That's cleared up now. Thanks. I guess I owe Alfredo an apology. I did take your first words literally and since I've known some vendors that are extremely arrogant.....to the point of making ridiculous claims......and they've irked me because of it, I was harsh in my critisism of Alfredo. I'm very happy to learn that he didn't deserve it and he really is a good guy and he is trying to help you figure out what went wrong and provide you with the plant's correct name, if possible. Again, good luck!


----------



## SlipperFan (Jul 8, 2015)

I'm glad this is all cleared up. I can't imagine thinking ill of Alfredo -- such a gentle man!


----------



## Bjorn (Jul 11, 2015)

Lastest news, now its been clarified, its a Rosalie Dixler x caudatum. Verified by Alfredo. One point to Robert


----------



## Drorchid (Jul 13, 2015)

Bjorn said:


> Lastest news, now its been clarified, its a Rosalie Dixler x caudatum. Verified by Alfredo. One point to Robert



:clap::clap::clap:

I do know my Phrags 

He should name it Phrag. Bjorn! As you were the first to bloom it!

Robert


----------



## John M (Jul 13, 2015)

Excellent news, Bjorn! Good job Rob! :clap:


----------



## Bjorn (Jul 14, 2015)

It will be named after my oldest daughter, Lilja Myhre.


----------



## Drorchid (Jul 14, 2015)

Bjorn said:


> It will be named after my oldest daughter, Lilja Myhre.



Very nice! Congratulations!

Robert


----------



## Bjorn (Jul 15, 2015)

Now officially Lilja Myhre


----------



## SlipperFan (Jul 15, 2015)

Bjorn said:


> Now officially Lilja Myhre



Very nice!


----------

