# Paph exul ?



## Leo Schordje (Dec 22, 2009)

I picked this plant up as a nbs seedling from a vendor in California. It was labelled Paph insigne at the time, the comment was that it was not an ordinary insigne, that something was different about it. I believe these were distributed to a quite a number of people, so some of you may have seedlings from the same batch. 

Well it bloomed, and I feel pretty comfortable calling this plant Paph exul. I have bloomed several exul over the years, and in every floral characteristic it seems to be Paph exul, but it is the most robust, tallest vegetatively of any exul I have ever owned. Plant size is more like insigne, but otherwise it looks like exul. My previous experience with exul is that it is a pretty compact species. However, it is seldom talked about as being 'small' in the literature, so I suspect that my previous exul were simply immature plants, grown in less than optimal conditions. I grow intermediate in summer to cool in winter. P. exul is reported to prefer warm temps most of the year, so I may simply not be getting full size out of my other plants. 

So take a look, let me know if you think I'm right or wrong. It is in a 4 inch pot, so total height to dorsal tip is about 18 inches.


----------



## John M (Dec 22, 2009)

Leo, I've grown exul and considered it one of my favourite species....although, I don't have one at the moment. 'Must change that! I've also done a LOT of looking at photos of exul on the Internet and found there to be a wide range of variety in the "look" of the different clones; barring the obviously mislabelled plants. IMHO, I'd say you've got an exul. The vendor probably was unfamiliar with exul and once insigne came to mind, he never questioned it again. It'd be interesting to know if his stock plant came to him without a name tag and he had to identify it. Or, if he's just never looked at the tag and simply always (incorrectly), thought of that plant as insigne. I'd have no problem changing the tag to exul. Like I said, there is a lot of variety in the "look" of the flowers posted on the Internet. Also, Zephyrus Orchids had a superior plant of exul offered for sale a couple years ago. They had a photo of it next to a normal, common quality clone. Theirs was huge, with excellent colour and form, in comparison....probably a 4N: yet, there was no doubt it was still a pure exul.


----------



## Shiva (Dec 22, 2009)

I agree with JohnM. The ventral sepal is very much like exul.


----------



## emydura (Dec 22, 2009)

The dorsal and sepal sure look like exul. But the leaves look nothing like mine. My leaves are much smaller and much more rigid. They certainly don't flop over. Mine also doesn't have any red colouring at the base of the leaves either. 

David


----------



## Pete (Dec 22, 2009)

thats by far the biggest beefiest _exul_ plant ive ever seen if its an _exul_


----------



## Shadow (Dec 22, 2009)

emydura said:


> But the leaves look nothing like mine. My leaves are much smaller and much more rigid. They certainly don't flop over. Mine also doesn't have any red colouring at the base of the leaves either.
> 
> David



Agree. The leaves of my exul are exactly the same as David has described his.


----------



## Leo Schordje (Dec 22, 2009)

Thanks John. 

David, the color on the leaf base is unusual. My other exul have no color at the leaf bases. By it's self I don't think the presence or absence of color at the leaf base is significant. The floppy foliage is most likely due in part to my growing this plant in low light. It had gotten shuffled off to the side where the appletonianums and hookerae are sulking in my shadows. I know exul would like it more rothschildianum bright. I suspect that in high light the leaves will stand up. I think if the flower agrees with exul, I will have to label it as exul. I certainly don't think it is insigne. It may be an unusual exul, unless someone has a different candidate? Are there any named varieties of exul?


----------



## biothanasis (Dec 22, 2009)

Lovely :clap:


----------



## etex (Dec 22, 2009)

It's a super exul!! Very nice!


----------



## SlipperFan (Dec 22, 2009)

Great dorsal, Leo. If this plant needs more light, you had better not tell it since it bloomed with lower light. Of course, with higher light, the bloom might even be better.


----------



## SlipperKing (Dec 22, 2009)

I guess it's exul. I can't find anything that proves it's not. The red at the base of the plant is my only concern.


----------



## paphjoint (Dec 23, 2009)

hmm looks like a cross exul x insigne or vice versa


----------



## JeanLux (Dec 23, 2009)

the foliage of the exul plant I got about 2 years ago looks very similar to Leo's one, very floppy! Unfortunately the plant did not yet flower! I' ll try a pic today! Jean


----------



## Leo Schordje (Dec 23, 2009)

So far, 

2 votes for definitely exul (me & John M)
3 votes for maybe not exul
1 vote for definitely not exul, rather that it is likely a hybrid. 

question, does insigne have red flush to its leaf base? 
by the way, the photo Jay Pfahl has on his site for insigne is really one of the varieties of villosum, so it can not be used as a standard for insigne.


----------



## JeanLux (Dec 23, 2009)

JeanLux said:


> the foliage of the exul plant I got about 2 years ago looks very similar to Leo's one, very floppy! ..... I' ll try a pic today! Jean



here it is ; greatest leaf span = 70cm (+/- 23 inch?) Jean


----------



## Rick (Dec 23, 2009)

My exul, foliage wise has pretty stiff upright leaves. I do grow it bright and hot though. I'm still at work, and can't recall red at the leaf bases.


The use of Epsom salts really increased leaf lenght this year by a good 20%, but I don't think the largest span is anywhere near 20".

It's got a spike on it now too (although its really about 1-2 months early If I remember correctly) and several other growths in sheath (normal for this time of year). It may be just a clonal difference, but the flower stem on mine is presently strongly pubescent and dark purple, and does not get much taller than the plant. At full extension there is some green pigment showing between the purple hair. I've never seen an exul spike as tall as yours (stretching for light??), but the spike length on my insigne is never incredibly long either. This reminds me of some of the hair splitting stuff concerncing hirsutisimum vs esquirolei.

There might be some issues in the photography, but this flower seems a bit greener and more washed out than my exul.

From general comments on this site I haven't heard of too many people doing well with exul (or flowering it) under cool shaded conditions anyway, so maybe a dash of insigne could have put a little hybrid vigor into this plant to get it to do well in your set of growing conditions????

Don't know if I have a firm opinion on this one Leo.


----------



## Rick (Dec 23, 2009)

JeanLux said:


> here it is ; greatest leaf span = 70cm (+/- 23 inch?) Jean



70 cm is 27.5 inches. That's a very big plant.

My biggest growth I just measured has a leaf span of 18", and definitely no red at the base of the plants.


----------



## Pete (Dec 23, 2009)

i agree with rick also, my exul leaves have very stiff, narrower, upright-ish leaves


----------



## emydura (Dec 24, 2009)

Here is my exul plant. I bought it about 2 years ago. It is growing well but I still haven't seen a flower. Maybe this coming autumn. As you can see it has a much different growth habit to Leo's plant. The pot would be 10cm wide.

Rick brings up a good point which I was thinking myself. It is not easy to flower exul in low light.

David


----------



## smartie2000 (Dec 24, 2009)

Could it have been a mutation of insigne that caused the synesepal to be bigger? We have seen other paph species (and hybrids) with mutations that cause huge synesepals, though it seems uncommon.


----------



## Leo Schordje (Dec 24, 2009)

David your exul looks like the my other exul, compact, stiff and green, though I notice just a hint of color at the edge of leaves at the leaf bases, or is that brown due to aging? Anyway, the vegetative growth of my exul that I pictured was the reason I did not think twice about the insigne label until it actually bloomed. I think the primary of (insigne x exul) would show more insigne in the flower. Finer spotting, more crinkle on the petal edges, etc. If this is a hybrid, it might be ((insigne x exul) x exul) but I would think, why would anyone bother doing that cross? I don't know. I really am curious if anyone else got these seedlings out of California.


----------



## emydura (Dec 24, 2009)

Leo Schordje said:


> though I notice just a hint of color at the edge of leaves at the leaf bases, or is that brown due to aging? .



Just aging. There is no real colour at the base.

David


----------



## Rick (Dec 24, 2009)

Leo Schordje said:


> David your exul looks like the my other exul, compact, stiff and green, though I notice just a hint of color at the edge of leaves at the leaf bases, or is that brown due to aging? Anyway, the vegetative growth of my exul that I pictured was the reason I did not think twice about the insigne label until it actually bloomed. I think the primary of (insigne x exul) would show more insigne in the flower. Finer spotting, more crinkle on the petal edges, etc. If this is a hybrid, it might be ((insigne x exul) x exul) but I would think, why would anyone bother doing that cross? I don't know. I really am curious if anyone else got these seedlings out of California.



I agree with your logic Leo, but could it also be possible that the backcross of vigorous intermediate growing exuls could have been the motive?

This one is a stumper for me. The history of the labeling is also difficult to get around. It kind of reminds me of the parrishii/dianthum issue. The flowers are obviously different but at one time dianthum was considered just a variety of parrishii. I think a lot of hybrids and misslabled plants are out there now because of the close taxonomy. I bought a plant from Oak hill labled as parrishii that bloomed out as dianthum, but I always wonder whether or not there was a lot of gene exchange going on by breeders before the taxonomists separated them better. Same for hirsutisimum/esquirolei.

I think a lot of breeding is done for vigor as well as developing certain flower traits.


----------



## NYEric (Dec 28, 2009)

I have no idea!


----------



## slippertalker (Dec 29, 2009)

Perhaps this is more a matter of variation within a species concept. It does look like exul, and while I'm not aware of the variation of exul , if a species has a widely dispersed growing region it is possible for specific endemic variation of plant growth, flower morphology, etc. We are seeing this commonly in the barbigerum group of flowers recently discovered and that are variations on a theme with traits that show a close relationship but with color, size and growth differences.


----------



## emydura (Dec 29, 2009)

slippertalker said:


> Perhaps this is more a matter of variation within a species concept. It does look like exul, and while I'm not aware of the variation of exul , if a species has a widely dispersed growing region it is possible for specific endemic variation of plant growth, flower morphology, etc. We are seeing this commonly in the barbigerum group of flowers recently discovered and that are variations on a theme with traits that show a close relationship but with color, size and growth differences.



Is there a lot of variation in exul? I thought it was found on one small island.

David


----------



## Leo Schordje (Dec 29, 2009)

Lance Birk's book says Krabi and nearby surounding areas, Thailand. Sounds like a small area to me. I don't know how isolating the geography in that location is.


----------



## Rick (Dec 30, 2009)

Cribb's book points to continued debate as to whether exul is a variety or subspecies of insigne. Apparently the original name of this plant was Cypripedium insigne var exul in 1891. It's habitat / range is very isolated, and I think exul is derived from exile because of its remote habit.

I know that everything is prone to some level of variation, but insigne seems to have a much wider range of variation than exul. 

The drawings of exul vs insigne staminodes in Cribb's book could be useful. For insigne the lower notch appears to have either some fine hair or serration in it while the while the U shaped notch in exul looks smooth.

The red base color and floppy plant habit could be diagnostic.


----------



## slippertalker (Dec 30, 2009)

I read through my library this morning and there is some varying information on this species. Braem starts calling it a variety and then in later publications calls it a closely related species. He also says that it is native to the east coast of the Malay peninsula in Thailand on islands along the coast.

Cribb in his early work calls it a species but also indicates that it has a range on both sides of the peninsula. Cash concurs with this.....Birk agrees with Braem on the location.

The plant has never been common in collections, but it doesn't seem to be endangered. I will have to look at my old Orchid Digest meanderings of Fowlie, etc to see what they say.


----------



## Leo Schordje (Dec 30, 2009)

Ah, the "Awash in the Bitter Sea" series by Jack Fowlie, I really enjoyed that series, I have no idea where that stack of OD is at now. I need to dig.


----------



## UweM (Dec 31, 2009)

The article about exul is in OD 4/76.

The leave of the exul are very strong. Here you find my exuls:






















Uwe


----------



## Leo Schordje (Dec 31, 2009)

Hi Uwe, thank you for posting your pictures. I think your flower and my flower agree nicely with each other, the hair pattern at the base of the staminode is nearly identical between both flowers. Staminode looks identical. The spot pattern in the dorsal is nearly identical. I think it is safe to label my plant "exul" based on the flower. The only question is due to the vegetative habit and the large size of the flower. I really don't see any insigne in my flower. 
Thanks


----------



## paphjoint (Dec 31, 2009)

Hey Leo - this is wishful thinking to me 
look at the flower proportions - for instance the dorsal on your flower is much more oblong (ovoid) than the pictures above

I don't mind you called it an exul though but don't cross it with anything ;-)

Happy new year



Leo Schordje said:


> Hi Uwe, thank you for posting your pictures. I think your flower and my flower agree nicely with each other, the hair pattern at the base of the staminode is nearly identical between both flowers. Staminode looks identical. The spot pattern in the dorsal is nearly identical. I think it is safe to label my plant "exul" based on the flower. The only question is due to the vegetative habit and the large size of the flower. I really don't see any insigne in my flower.
> Thanks


----------



## Leo Schordje (Dec 31, 2009)

paphjoint said:


> Hey Leo - this is wishful thinking to me
> look at the flower proportions - for instance the dorsal on your flower is much more oblong (ovoid) than the pictures above
> 
> I don't mind you called it an exul though but don't cross it with anything ;-)
> ...



Point well taken. And I will heed this advice. No plans to breed with this plant. I will not be propagating it as "the real" exul.


----------

