# The first AQ award in Taiwan



## weiyiatosu (Oct 29, 2009)

The first AQ in Taiwan was awarded to a Paph. spicerianum cross on Oct. 27, 2009. To my knowledge, it is also the first AQ given to Paph. spicerianum. Enjoy!!


----------



## e-spice (Oct 29, 2009)

Wow - that's spectacular. The dorsal typically reflexes so much on spicerianum. Thanks for posting the picture.

e-spice


----------



## callosum (Oct 29, 2009)

*quality*

a perfectly bloom:rollhappy:


----------



## fbrem (Oct 29, 2009)

an outstanding group, nice work, congrats


----------



## TyroneGenade (Oct 29, 2009)

Very impressive. Those flowers are so beautiful!


----------



## labskaus (Oct 29, 2009)

That's an excellent group of the species, well done!


----------



## Rick (Oct 29, 2009)

I miss the typical spicerianum parasol dorsal, but those are a nice group of fat wide flowers.


----------



## e-spice (Oct 29, 2009)

Rick said:


> I miss the typical spicerianum parasol dorsal, but those are a nice group of fat wide flowers.



Sometimes I wonder if the spicerianums that have exceptionally flat dorsals don't have some small amount of another species that flatten out the dorsal that are so dramatically different that the common spicerianum.

I like the look of the flat dorsal but have always wondered.

e-spice


----------



## JeanLux (Oct 29, 2009)

Impressive team!!!! (11  ) Jean


----------



## NYEric (Oct 29, 2009)

Is it yours?! If so, congrats! If not, thanx for sharing!


----------



## Scott Ware (Oct 29, 2009)

What an amazing amount of variation, especially between the two most front and center. Fascinating to imagine they all came from the same capsule.


----------



## GuRu (Oct 29, 2009)

Very impessive group of 'spice' !! I like particularely the greenisch one in the very first line. :drool:

Best regards from germany, rudolf


----------



## slippertalker (Oct 29, 2009)

Nice flowers, do you know the parents? To selectively breed a species like this to produce flatter dorsals is a fine accomplishment.

They actually look a lot like Paph Bruno.


----------



## goldenrose (Oct 29, 2009)

GuRu said:


> Very impessive group of 'spice' !! I like particularely the greenisch one in the very first line. :drool:
> 
> Best regards from germany, rudolf



That's the one they grabbed my attention too!  :clap:
Gorgeous group of a wonderful species!:drool:


----------



## Berrak (Oct 29, 2009)

Fantastic display - very betiful flowers.


----------



## aquacorps (Oct 29, 2009)

Is it a hybrid or species?


----------



## KyushuCalanthe (Oct 29, 2009)

Beautiful! I like the two with the really wide dorsals on the lower right.


----------



## paphioboy (Oct 29, 2009)

OMG... :drool: :drool: :drool:


----------



## Roth (Oct 29, 2009)

OH MY GOD !!!!!!!!!!!!!


It's Paphiopedilum Bruno hybrids selfings and crossings, the flowers are typical, so is the variation in color and shape, everyone should know that. 

Who are the stupid judges that gave an AQ to that crap ???


----------



## SlipperFan (Oct 29, 2009)

weiyiatosu said:


> The first AQ in Taiwan was awarded to a Paph. spicerianum *cross* on Oct. 27, 2009.


If it's a cross, it's not spicerianum.

I agree, it looks just like my Bruno -- which I like a lot, especially since it was my very first orchid.


----------



## Candace (Oct 29, 2009)

> If it's a cross, it's not spicerianum.



Dot, that's exactly what he means.


----------



## SlipperFan (Oct 29, 2009)

Candace said:


> Dot, that's exactly what he means.



Then I don't understand this statement: "...it is also the first AQ given to Paph. spicerianum."


----------



## SlipperKing (Oct 29, 2009)

I'm always supicous of these flat dorsaled spicies. I have 4 plants in bud with very dark bases and I'll be surprised and delighted if they turnout to be beefy spicies. If they have flat dorsals, well crap, I'll have to buy more from a different source.
They do have clonal named parents, 'Kenta' HCC/AOS and 'Miao Hua' BM/TPS, anyone know anything about these parents?


----------



## delphiguy (Oct 29, 2009)

amazing display of flowers. thanks for sharing.


----------



## Rick (Oct 29, 2009)

SlipperFan said:


> Then I don't understand this statement: "...it is also the first AQ given to Paph. spicerianum."




I don't get it either.


----------



## gonewild (Oct 29, 2009)

I think Terry Root produced a batch that looked like this and the judges accused him of it being a hybrid and refused to judge them. I'm not sure but I think they were spices. I just remember seeing a picture of a whole bench that had huge flat dorsals. The rest of his story about it was about his opinion of judging. He seemed to know what his parentage was. waybe these are from his breeding.


----------



## Roth (Oct 29, 2009)

gonewild said:


> I think Terry Root produced a batch that looked like this and the judges accused him of it being a hybrid and refused to judge them. I'm not sure but I think they were spices. I just remember seeing a picture of a whole bench that had huge flat dorsals. The rest of his story about it was about his opinion of judging. He seemed to know what his parentage was. waybe these are from his breeding.



Not at all... Terry Root got as well cheated by buying extrahuge spicerianum way back from a nurseryman in England, Mike T... Even Terry had a fake roth Mt Millais pictured for a couple of years back when he had his website, coming from the same guy. Those extrahuge spicerianum, known in Europe as spicerianum Giganteum are a backcross of a 2n Bruno onto spicerianum, made for pot-plant. The nursery who had that was known as Clements, near Rotterdam. Some more were bought straight by a couple of extremely famous US orchid growers few years ago and sold as spicerianum.

Those are definitely Bruno, I have seen for years that Taiwaneses were selling Bruno as spicerianum, so now they even get an AQ on it. And yes, those AOS judges in their extreme stupidity awarded a batch of Bruno as spicerianum.

The same happens to lawrenceanum hyeanum, which apparently is completely extinct in cultivation - Tradition is an hybrid, and the superbiens album, that are as well progeny of Goultenianum. Add to that Pinnochio, the fake stonei from Taiwan - their growth habit is definitely unlike any stonei I have seen, and the flowers looks a bit different, maybe the stonei album - I start to have big doubts about that one -, some fake insigne, villosum, etc... that makes the whole picture. But for sure those "spicerianum" are hybrids. In Paphs of Taiwan 1 2 3 4 there are several bruno already pictured as spicerianum, so it is not surprising.


----------



## Roth (Oct 29, 2009)

SlipperKing said:


> I'm always supicous of these flat dorsaled spicies. I have 4 plants in bud with very dark bases and I'll be surprised and delighted if they turnout to be beefy spicies. If they have flat dorsals, well crap, I'll have to buy more from a different source.
> They do have clonal named parents, 'Kenta' HCC/AOS and 'Miao Hua' BM/TPS, anyone know anything about these parents?



No, except that it must be MiaO Hua, from Hung Sheng nursery. There is a picture of that cross on Parkside orchids, definitely the same crap as the AQ, maybe exactly the same parents - in Taiwan it is not a problem to sell flasks of the same cross with different parents names, that's why I would never touch flasks of their roths or sands, except 1 or 2 suppliers.


----------



## weiyiatosu (Oct 30, 2009)

I should have said its a sibling cross between two select spicerianum clones when I made the posting. I apologize for the confusion. 

I was fortunate enough to witness the judging when the spicerianum sibling cross was awarded on October 22. I have some words to say regarding earlier comments. 

Firstly, all of the judges in Taiwan Paphiopedium Society are very experienced growers and possess extensive knowledge in the field. There are frequent interactions between TPS judges and judges from all over the world (i.e. U.S.A, Japan, and Thailand). The standard of the TPS judging system and quality of the TPS judges should be comparable to others. JOGA gave out at least an FCC and a BM to spicerianum with flatter dorsal. 

Secondly, to my knowledge, the seed pods using Burno as a parent are often inviable or produce only very few seedlings. However, the grower has more than twenty thousand seedlings. Hence, it should not a hybrid made of Burno and spicerianum. 

Thirdly, the claim that Taiwanese vendors sell Burno as spicerianum is not sound because in Asia, Burno divisions are worth a lot more than spicerianum. Why would they sell Burno as spicerianum for less money?

Lastly, I think it is a little bit illogical to assume it is Bruno hybrids selfings or crossings just because the blooms have flatter dorsal. We all see the improvement in besseae in terms of color, size and form over the years. Why cannot there be an improvement in spicerianum as well?

The harsh words toward TPS judges and the grower all seem a little unfair to me.


----------



## aquacorps (Oct 30, 2009)

weiyiatosu, I just wanted to make sure they were species. Everyone thinks they everything about spicerianum.


----------



## Roth (Oct 30, 2009)

weiyiatosu said:


> weiyiatosu said:
> 
> 
> > all of the judges in Taiwan Paphiopedium Society are very experienced growers and possess extensive knowledge in the field. There are frequent interactions between TPS judges and judges from all over the world (i.e. U.S.A, Japan, and Thailand). The standard of the TPS judging system and quality of the TPS judges should be comparable to others. JOGA gave out at least an FCC and a BM to spicerianum with flatter dorsal.
> ...


----------



## paphioland (Oct 30, 2009)

SlipperKing said:


> I'm always supicous of these flat dorsaled spicies. I have 4 plants in bud with very dark bases and I'll be surprised and delighted if they turnout to be beefy spicies. If they have flat dorsals, well crap, I'll have to buy more from a different source.
> They do have clonal named parents, 'Kenta' HCC/AOS and 'Miao Hua' BM/TPS, anyone know anything about these parents?



how about a flat Charlesworthii


----------



## slippertalker (Oct 30, 2009)

SlipperFan said:


> Then I don't understand this statement: "...it is also the first AQ given to Paph. spicerianum."



AQ's can also be given to species crosses. A good example is Paph rothschildianum (Borneo x Charles E) that the Tonkins created years ago and greatly increased the captive population of that species. AQ's have also been given to other paphs, including acmodontum, wardii, moquettianum, godefroyae, lowii, sukhakulii, bellatulum, henryanum, venustum, fairreanum in the last 15 years or so. 

Selective breeding is creating "better" quality species as the best are crossed with the best. 

The definition of an AQ is "awarded once to a strain (the result of a mating of specific cultivars) exhibited by a single individual as a group of not less than 12 different clones or the inflorescences thereof, of a raised species or hybrid, which may or may not have been made before, when the result is of sufficient improvement over the former type. " It goes on to say that at least one cultivar has to have a quality award and that the parents need to be defined.


----------



## fibre (Oct 30, 2009)

Judges -and so do breeders also- prefer big, round and flat Paphiopedilum flowers. A lot of amateurs are following them. I do not, not always.

 I like the reflecting dorsal of P. spicerianum very much! I also like wavily petals! 

So I ask myself, why there are no complex Paphs bred of species as appletonianum, spicerianum, villosum, tigrinum, gratrixianum, ... with tubular dorsals?
IMO Paphs are not only made to photograph their front side, but to look at them as a three dimensional artwork. 

As long as flatnes is a goal in breeding, some will do strange things as seen here in this thrad. Those flat "spicerianums" are not my favorites.

____variatio delectat__________,__fibre_____


----------



## slippertalker (Oct 30, 2009)

I've heard that opinion before, but the truth is that there is no market for such things. People enjoy well formed flowers, and even in the face of the purists who prefer jungle versions of species, they will almost always purchase the standard that judges and hybridizers prefer.


----------



## fibre (Oct 30, 2009)

slippertalker said:


> ... People enjoy well formed flowers, ...



I prefer well formed flowers too. IMO trumpet-like dorsals are well formed too. 




slippertalker said:


> ... and even in the face of the purists who prefer jungle versions of species...



Don't misunderstand my post: I don't think, that jungle versions have more beauty. Not at all! I love the modern flat Hybrids, but sometimes they become boaring. 


----:wink:--variatio delectat--:wink:-------,--fibre-----


----------



## SlipperFan (Oct 30, 2009)

fibre said:


> Judges -and so do breeders also- prefer big, round and flat Paphiopedilum flowers. A lot of amateurs are following them. I do not, not always.
> 
> I like the reflecting dorsal of P. spicerianum very much! I also like wavily petals!
> 
> ...



I like your thinking. I will have to rethink why I have tended to like flat dorsals, especially since I was a sculptor before I got into photography.


----------



## gonewild (Oct 30, 2009)

SlipperFan said:


> I like your thinking. I will have to rethink why I have tended to like flat dorsals, especially since I was a sculptor before I got into photography.



That is simple.... Flat dorsals are easier to photograph. :rollhappy:


----------



## SlipperFan (Oct 30, 2009)

gonewild said:


> That is simple.... Flat dorsals are easier to photograph. :rollhappy:



Actually, that's a very good observation. But I still have 3D eyes, so you'd think I'd have a greater appreciation of the flowers that are more 3D. And I tend to fight with the judges around here that demand roundness as the only valid criteria for awards (slight exaggeration here). So what I'm saying is that I need to take myself to task!


----------



## gonewild (Oct 30, 2009)

SlipperFan said:


> So what I'm saying is that I need to take myself to task!



Who do you think will win?


----------



## Kevin (Oct 31, 2009)

fibre said:


> Judges -and so do breeders also- prefer big, round and flat Paphiopedilum flowers. A lot of amateurs are following them. I do not, not always.
> 
> I like the reflecting dorsal of P. spicerianum very much! I also like wavily petals!
> 
> ...




I agree completely! I have a Paph. Lathmanianum that was scoffed at by one judge, because it had a reflexed dorsal. I was thinking - it's supposed to have a reflexed dorsal! But, again, flat is what's 'in'. Is the point of a hybrid to show the best characteristics of both parents? How many of the typical spicerianums with reflexed dorsals have been awared? Probably none. Even though it is a perfect example of the species, not an 'improvement'. But, people like trying to 'improve' on nature all the time. Impossible, as far as I'm concerned. Try putting some of the newest line-bred Phrag. besseaes into the wild. Would they survive? The were created they way they are for a reason.

By the way, the Paphs that got the AQ here are amazing, and very eye-catching, but if they are real spicerianums, they don't represent the species very well. What is considered in judging? Who's idea is it to award higher points to larger, bigger and flatter? Is this the goal, even if if the end result does not even look like the species any more? Not everyone has the same idea of 'improvement'. This, then gets into judging and personal bias. What might be 'in' today might not be 'in' tomorrow.


----------



## paphioboy (Oct 31, 2009)

This thread has got interesting..  All this breeding hybrids that look very much like the real species and trying to pass them off as the naturally-occurring species is going to cause a lot of confusion for both the judges and hobbyists alike..


----------



## Brabantia (Nov 1, 2009)

paphioboy said:


> This thread has got interesting..  All this breeding hybrids that look very much like the real species and trying to pass them off as the naturally-occurring species is going to cause a lot of confusion for both the judges and hobbyists alike..


.... and a good opportunity to increase the prices.


----------



## NYEric (Nov 1, 2009)

I'm glad Sanderianum has exposed us to the chance that the award was mis-awarded. No dis-credit to the grower. That said I wonder how he got $#itty thru the filters!


----------



## SlipperFan (Nov 1, 2009)

gonewild said:


> Who do you think will win?



:rollhappy: If it's up to me, I myself will win.


----------



## Eric Muehlbauer (Nov 1, 2009)

Although it has been years since I've bloomed a spicerianum, as I recall, there is a day or two when it first opens and the dorsal is flat...then it reflexes. Somewhere in my old photo albums should be a pic I took of a very ordinary spicerianum the day it opened fully, and the dorsal is quite flat...didn't stay that way for long, though.....


----------



## tenman (Nov 4, 2009)

Sanderianum said:


> weiyiatosu said:
> 
> 
> > Second, there are things that are possible, and some others that are not possible within a species. For spicerianum, there is a semialbum, awarded by the AOS long time ago, I got a purple wild plant, an albino wild plant, I have seen some thousands wild plants in bloom, none with the flat dorsal as well... I know there is another purple flowered plant in Germany too...
> ...


----------



## cnycharles (Nov 4, 2009)

Sanderianum said:


> And in Taiwan as well, we have the Phalaenopsis tetraspis C-1 and Specios, that are the most blatant scam. A Taiwanese grower published pictures of his breeding of corningiana x tetraspis in the early 90's, then this cross has NEVER been registered, and the same flowers, same cross are now sold as tetraspis C-1...



hello sanderianum,
I'm not trying to discount what you are saying, I'm just hoping for clarification. I have been told that an american taxonomist had looked at tetraspis c#1 and said that it was speciosa. I haven't received permission to pass along details other than that; if I do I will. Do you have any pictures of the hybrid cross and any other documentation about it? I have one of these received in a trade, and want to know if I should bother keeping it alive. I'm not really a hybrid grower, and I guess I could put it on a raffle table with the note (NOID)... I'm definitely not a taxonomist or want to play one on tv or otherwise (smile) and am obviously lost if two differing authorities disagree on this subject

actually, I just found the taxonomist in question named already in this post
http://www.slippertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?p=179276

I did an rhs hybrid name search or parentage search, and found no results for corningiana x tetraspis or reverse, to confirm from pictures if they look the same. I'm surprised if there have been speciosa in cultivation recently, why didn't they try to propagate that and sell seedlings of it? (or the parent plants for a lot of money)
thanks

I actually found quite a discussion last year about this on another forum here
http://chat.phalaenopsis.net/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=6060&sid=a89a89c252da5bd9acecc3f5d1160b8c&start=30
and Dean Stock says that the habitat where speciosa had been found was thoroughly destroyed before he was able to look for it during the 1960's, and that no-one had established it in culture before that time.


----------



## Roth (Nov 5, 2009)

cnycharles said:


> hello sanderianum,
> 
> I'm not trying to discount what you are saying, I'm just hoping for clarification. I have been told that an american taxonomist had looked at tetraspis c#1 and said that it was speciosa. I haven't received permission to pass along details other than that; if I do I will. Do you have any pictures of the hybrid cross and any other documentation about it?



I try to find out the book, it was one of the earlier Taiwanese books about Phalaenopsis, limited edition, the wonders of phalaenopsis or a title like that... 

I know several taxonomists said that tetraspis C1 is speciosa, but they have no clue about hybrids, line breeding, etc... for sure C1 is an hybrid, nothing more, nothing less. When one compare with real paintings or herbarinum specimens of speciosa, the C1 are completely different... Furthermore, the earlier selfings of c1 always gave some tetraspis-like flowers, and a lot of weird things. I have seen as well some selfings of the "speciosa" around, that are a darker red C1, and many look like C1 or like a tetraspis. When I saw this, the owner of the nursery told me that maybe they mixed up with seedlings of tetraspis when potting...



> I did an rhs hybrid name search or parentage search, and found no results for corningiana x tetraspis or reverse, to confirm from pictures if they look the same. I'm surprised if there have been speciosa in cultivation recently, why didn't they try to propagate that and sell seedlings of it? (or the parent plants for a lot of money)



That's normal that this hybrid has not been registered. The owner realized quite quickly what he could do with that. From a 2Us hybrid to, after a couple more generation selfing siblings, a 300USD seedling of c1 in the earlier days. Great... Now they work on speciosa speciosa, the solid red color, and some speciosa seedlings have been offered in the last couple of years, solid red color. The C1 or R&B clones have no proven origin to the wild, the sellers simply just said that they are wild collected, and end of the story.

The last points, there are some herbarium specimens in Paris, and they show quite a few flowers opened at the same time, 6-8. Something I have not seen in the C1 as well...



> and Dean Stock says that the habitat where speciosa had been found was thoroughly destroyed before he was able to look for it during the 1960's, and that no-one had established it in culture before that time.



There are many places where speciosa could be found in Andaman and Nicobar, so there is still some hope to find out some plants one day... Like the one presently in Thailand and found through a wealthy nurseryman, now deceased, who paid a small fortune fishermen to approach those islands few years ago. He got 3 plants, 2 died, and one is in a private Thai collection in central Bangkok, where they attempt to propagate it. The plant is really unique, especially the flower stem with dozens of nodes...


----------



## Chien (Nov 5, 2009)

Sanderianum said:


> Simply because a SELECTED spicerianum is worth a lot more than Bruno. Bruno is not very expensive in Taiwan, so far in Bangkok the wholesale price was USD3/growth



Where did you get this information? Is that true?
My friend in BKK told me that 1 growth cost 3000 Baht, that's almost USD100. If you know where we can buy 1 growth for USD3, you must tell me, we will happy to buy a lot!


----------



## valenzino (Nov 5, 2009)

Sanderianum said:


> I try to find out the book, it was one of the earlier Taiwanese books about Phalaenopsis, limited edition, the wonders of phalaenopsis or a title like that...
> 
> I know several taxonomists said that tetraspis C1 is speciosa, but they have no clue about hybrids, line breeding, etc... for sure C1 is an hybrid, nothing more, nothing less. When one compare with real paintings or herbarinum specimens of speciosa, the C1 are completely different... Furthermore, the earlier selfings of c1 always gave some tetraspis-like flowers, and a lot of weird things. I have seen as well some selfings of the "speciosa" around, that are a darker red C1, and many look like C1 or like a tetraspis. When I saw this, the owner of the nursery told me that maybe they mixed up with seedlings of tetraspis when potting...
> 
> ...



I can agree on many things but I have other infos about it.

I've seen tetraspis x corningiana hybrid and is compleately different from c1.
But I can immagine that selecting on thausand plants,a genetic mix of the random pink lines on tetraspis with the red colour of corningiana can give the C1 outcome,but still not convinced about it.

About the speciosa itself,there are some wild collected plants in Malaysia,from 2 different imports.All the plants have been purchased by private Malaysian collectors(the plants arrived in Johor area in a small nursery).I've seen 2 of this plants in flower.
The form and dimension of flower and the way they flower are quite different from C1.Also the plant itself is different,more bellina like than tetraspis like....flatter rounder leaves.
The flowers are compleately red with a soffusion of white starting from the column and running on the median venature of petals and sepals(nearly invisible but looking with attention can see it).
Quite long stems.This plant is known in malaysia as Phal imperatrix but I think in reality is the true simple Phal.speciosa.
A friend of us (NG) use to have one many years ago(years before C1 appeared) hidden in the trees around his nursery...obviously he refused to reproduce and killed the plant like a lot of others in his nursery...
At first I thinked that he have not killed the plant and sold to taiwanese that have crossed it with tetraspis and obtained C1.But i had no possibility to find evidence about it.


----------



## luvsorchids (Nov 5, 2009)

I find the possibility that species (both Phal and Paph-and maybe others) are actually hybrids masquerading as species to be rather disturbing. I wish there was a more definitive way of determing what is what.

This has me thinking. What about Phal. micholitzii? That species has the reputation for being slow growing and more difficult to cultivate. I have recently seen lines of Taiwanese micholizii being advertised as being more vigorous and easy to grow. Are these pure species that have been line bred for vigor or hybrids that have been line bred to look like michlizii?

Susan


----------



## cnycharles (Nov 5, 2009)

luvsorchids said:


> I find the possibility that species (both Phal and Paph-and maybe others) are actually hybrids masquerading as species to be rather disturbing. I wish there was a more definitive way of determing what is what.
> 
> This has me thinking. What about Phal. micholitzii? That species has the reputation for being slow growing and more difficult to cultivate. I have recently seen lines of Taiwanese micholizii being advertised as being more vigorous and easy to grow. Are these pure species that have been line bred for vigor or hybrids that have been line bred to look like michlizii?
> 
> Susan



well, to make a hybrid micholitzii, you would need to have white flowers that have the same or nearly the same shape. off the top of my head I don't remember that many or any. if there is something else that has it's shape and color, then there could be a possibility but if there isn't another flower similar, then you wouldn't have anything to hybridize it with. at least one nice thing about having a 'white' color where something with another color could be meddled with


----------



## Roth (Nov 6, 2009)

valenzino said:


> I can agree on many things but I have other infos about it.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Roth (Nov 6, 2009)

cnycharles said:


> well, to make a hybrid micholitzii, you would need to have white flowers that have the same or nearly the same shape. off the top of my head I don't remember that many or any. if there is something else that has it's shape and color, then there could be a possibility but if there isn't another flower similar, then you wouldn't have anything to hybridize it with. at least one nice thing about having a 'white' color where something with another color could be meddled with



The lineage of Michael Ooi for his famous violacea alba included micholitzii in the early breeding, all the Malaysians know about that - and sometimes a few funny violacea alba appears i a selfing of what we believe to be a violacea alba thanks to him...


----------



## valenzino (Nov 6, 2009)

Sanderianum said:


> The lineage of Michael Ooi for his famous violacea alba included micholitzii in the early breeding, all the Malaysians know about that - and sometimes a few funny violacea alba appears i a selfing of what we believe to be a violacea alba thanks to him...



Absolutely true,I,ve seen in a nursery of a friend in malaysia at same time,breeding from Michae ooi,a new violacea alba wild collected and micholitzii, in flower at same time,and michael ooi breading have a strange similarity in the lip with micholitzii....same problem I suspect in the new P.bellina alba that are around now....probably few are true but majority are bellina x violacea alba......


----------



## cnycharles (Nov 6, 2009)

hmm, I have a violacea alba I got in a flask from southeast asia (brain and memory is fuzzy at moment) and another I got in flask from australia. the one from australia is what I would expect a 'species' and an alba violacea, and the first one looks very very nice, but a bit different from the second and is so nice it could be a hybrid. the flowers are amazingly flat. I guess I'll have to look at what makes a micholitzii lip and all and see if there is any of it there. I almost made an outcross but didn't get around to it, maybe it's good that I didn't

I have a feeling that some 'unusual' bellina or some of the bellina 'coerulea' are actually crosses with violacea in there. to me a bellina has clear-cut purple and green areas with maybe slight mix between the two (probably very poor assumption on my part), but I've seen pictures of some very wild things that seem a bit much for a bellina, also I've seen pictures of things called bellina coerulea that seems to have a wash of pink through the green. wonder if that's creation or very wishful thinking to call it a coerulea, or if it's just another hybrid (maybe even an innocent one from when violacea malaysia and violacea borneo were both violacea, and variety cross was done and later switched from violacea to bellina?)


----------



## NYEric (Nov 6, 2009)

Refund! :fight:


----------



## paphioboy (Nov 7, 2009)

Charles, sorry to hear about the mix-up/misidentification (whether intentional or not).. I think the white 'hybrid' may be Penang Violacea (violacea alba x micholitzii, if I'm not mistaken).. 

Regarding phal violacea and its numerous varieties, maybe its not the nursery's fault. I assume that maybe the nursery owner made the cross while phal bellina was still considered as 'violacea var. borneo', hence the genetics might be a bit muddy, especially if they cross different varieties/strains together.. Got sure about the wild specimens that look like hybrids, though..


----------



## Roth (Nov 7, 2009)

paphioboy said:


> Charles, sorry to hear about the mix-up/misidentification (whether intentional or not).. I think the white 'hybrid' may be Penang Violacea (violacea alba x micholitzii, if I'm not mistaken)..
> 
> Regarding phal violacea and its numerous varieties, maybe its not the nursery's fault. I assume that maybe the nursery owner made the cross while phal bellina was still considered as 'violacea var. borneo', hence the genetics might be a bit muddy, especially if they cross different varieties/strains together.. Got sure about the wild specimens that look like hybrids, though..



No, Michael Ooi bred the Penang Violacea, then he used that Penang Violacea to make more 'clear and clean' violacea alba to sell... He made it first, on purpose. 

The second thing that is far from clear is the source of those violacea dark blue, still originally from Michael Ooi. To my mind they are hybrids of Xth generation. There is no dark blue violacea in the wild, even remotely close like that. I remember I heard somewhere that there could have been some other species such as venosa in the ancestry, many generations. In Malaysia, many violacea are not pure bred anyway, some even have back some lueddemaniana. What is very suspicious with those blue violacea is that apparently the original crosses are producing white, pink, and blue. it is not really normal I am afraid...

The bellina alba are purely a scam, I have seen only 2 times jungle bellina alba in face. 

The bellina alba on the market have been bred on purpose with violacea alba, as "bellina alba" appeared on the market very recently, at a time where everyone knows that bellina and violacea are different species...

The bellina coerulea, the history is far more complicated. There are 2 different simultaneous origins of bellina coerulea. One happens to be 3 plants - maybe 4 - jungle collected. They are real marvels, I have seen one in bloom sold to Krairit in Thailand for 8000USD - that plant subsequently died.

Another one in Malaysia is said to have produced flasks, selfing, and siblings with krairit plant. So far, I got flasks of both supposedly, from 2 nurseries in Malaysia. Only one entire flask was coerulea, the remaining was pure garbage, hybrids of harlequins... Another scam.

A couple years later, Taiwan started to sell bellina coerulea, but from a 'different' parent. So far I am sure that the Taiwanese bellina coerulea are in fact Samera coerulea...


----------



## valenzino (Nov 7, 2009)

Sanderianum said:


> No, Michael Ooi bred the Penang Violacea, then he used that Penang Violacea to make more 'clear and clean' violacea alba to sell... He made it first, on purpose.
> 
> The second thing that is far from clear is the source of those violacea dark blue, still originally from Michael Ooi. To my mind they are hybrids of Xth generation. There is no dark blue violacea in the wild, even remotely close like that. I remember I heard somewhere that there could have been some other species such as venosa in the ancestry, many generations. In Malaysia, many violacea are not pure bred anyway, some even have back some lueddemaniana. What is very suspicious with those blue violacea is that apparently the original crosses are producing white, pink, and blue. it is not really normal I am afraid...
> 
> ...



Agree on everything but not on the dark coerulea violacea.I can agree that proably the norton line breeding that cames originally from Michael Ooi,can be x generation hybrids.
But there are 3 very interesting plants(1 still alive the other 2 died) arrived in a bunch of wild collected violacea.The original plants have never been released.The owners have reproduced them...up to 3000 plants but unfortunately during a show in Europe their workers given wrong proportion fertilizer to the plants(1/100 instead of 1/1000) and killed many of them.A good number of them still alive and getting back to flowering size but owners will only sell few after all plants wll flower to select the best for next generation.
In this case all plants reproduced have given coerulea result and not a mix.
The plants are very slow grower and difficult and die easily.
Here a photo of one of seedling I had the luck to have as a gift from them,before the disaster.Like always the photo cant catch the real colour.
Also attached a photo of a true violacea alba.


----------



## e-spice (Nov 7, 2009)

Here's some info from the Orchidview website, where the blue violaceas first started appearing. http://www.orchidview.com/Birth_of_the_Blues.htm

I have a blue violacea I got from the Nortons. I got it as a seedling and have grown it for about four years. I was thrilled when the first bud started opening and I could tell it was going to be blue. It has improved significantly on subsequent bloomings. Below is the last flowering. Color is pretty accurate, which, as many have noted, is very difficult to capture in a photograph for some reason.









Sanderianum said:


> The second thing that is far from clear is the source of those violacea dark blue, still originally from Michael Ooi. To my mind they are hybrids of Xth generation. There is no dark blue violacea in the wild, even remotely close like that. I remember I heard somewhere that there could have been some other species such as venosa in the ancestry, many generations. In Malaysia, many violacea are not pure bred anyway, some even have back some lueddemaniana. What is very suspicious with those blue violacea is that apparently the original crosses are producing white, pink, and blue. it is not really normal I am afraid...


----------



## valenzino (Nov 7, 2009)

the photo of the violacea blue in my post was so terrible,here a link for a better photo.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/3507923162/sizes/l/


Nice Norton.Like it!


----------



## cnycharles (Nov 7, 2009)

i've seen plants in the u.s. that are the result of sib and self crossings of plants that were slightly indigo more than the standard color, and they have been consistently taking the more 'blue' ones each time. the first ones really weren't dark or blue, but a little different than the standard purple violacea. some of these I would think would be more likely to be a blue violacea since they weren't taken from plants that really had much dark color or blue at all, just slightly different (maybe the far end of a color cline), and were developed into what's blue now. 
what is supposed to be the 'standard' for what qualifies as a 'bellina coerulea'? I'm less likely to believe a bellina coerulea being a true species than I am a violacea coerulea, but I don't really know that much (smile)


----------



## Roth (Nov 7, 2009)

valenzino said:


> Here a photo of one of seedling I had the luck to have as a gift from them,before the disaster.Like always the photo cant catch the real colour.
> Also attached a photo of a true violacea alba.



Very beautiful violacea coerulea... In the Norton line, I have seen some that were far, far, darker than that, that's why it is very suspicious. The other suspicious thing being that some flowered 'albino' and some flowered standard, whilst a few did not have the color extending up to the petal tips. So maybe the Norton are real violacea coerulea, but so far I would say there was some micholitzii somewhere in the lineage before, and another species, I have heard about venosa or lueddemaniana, the latter having been used to make darker violacea quite a long time ago, so both are possible...

As for the bellina coerulea, I have seen the plant fresh from the jungle at Krairit, in bloom, so there is no doubt it really and truly exists... Ng had another one that I have seen, and Creative Orchid another one, the latter being the ownership apparently of a wealthy malaysian grower who loves to grow garden-table size phals gigantea... But the ones from Taiwan are most likely Samera coerulea, there is no lineage up to those jungle plants from their seedlings...


----------



## cnycharles (Nov 7, 2009)

here is a link to a pic of one of the parents of the 'violacea alba' I bought from tops orchids (the plant I got was seedling of Phal violacea 'alba' '1170' X Phal violacea 'alba' 'MO1K')

http://topsorchid.20m.com/cgi-bin/i/D338violalba.jpg

and here is a link to what's listed at tops orchids as being 'penang violacea'
http://topsorchid.20m.com/D150tops.html#top

see any difference? the violacea albas really have a diamond-shaped lip, and if you look at the penang violacea and the micholitzii, they also have the diamond-shaped lip. the interesting thing is, the seedling from tops orchids I mentioned above sold as violacea alba select, is very flat but it is also very white. when I look at most pics of violacea alba and penang violacea, they all have green color to it. this flower is really flat and very white. 
opinions? another interesting thing is that on tops orchids' species gallery, they have a plant they call 'violacea alba' that looks exactly like what they also call violacea (borneo), that the shape is exactly like many of their bellinas except with no color, which would seem to make it a true bellina alba. I bought a bellina alba from bigleaforchids a number of years ago, and it seemed to have a different shape from the 'albas' I have now, unfortunately I dried it out one too many times and it died and they didn't have any more for sale. I always wonder if that were a true bellina alba

also btw, my second violacea alba which I got as flask from burleigh park in australia, looks much like the plant valenzino shows as being a true violacea alba so I'm happy; it really does look like a 'species' to me both flowers and plant


----------

