# Paph. sanderianum vs. Paph. rothschildianum



## The Orchid Boy (Jun 30, 2013)

I've been wondering, why is Paph. rothschildianum so popular, more popular than Paph. sanderianum? It is called the "king of paphs" and there is lots of line breeding and it is easy to find different crosses of rothschildianum, many websites and sellers list many crosses but usually have 1 sanderianum cross or they have a few and don't bother with the cross name. Sanderianum seems to me like it should be the king of paphs. Rothschildianum's have gotten a lot of FCCs and in the older information I looked in, sanderianum's received none. Do judges show favoritism? Paph. sanderianum is my favorite orchid and when I ask nonorchid friends if they like sanderianum or rothschildianum better, they usually say sanderianum. Since sanderianum is my favorite, I wish it was more popular. So why has rothschildianum always been more popular?


----------



## Rick (Jun 30, 2013)

Ease of culture seems to have trumped "popularity".

Sanderianum and roth were discovered about the same time (1880-1890), but all the original import sandies were fairly short lived (unlike the roths).

At one point no one could even find sanderianum in Borneo and it was "rediscovered" fairly recently (I think in the 70's or 80's??). All the while people were doing good enough with roths to actually get some line breeding going (although there was a huge resurgence with fresh imports around the same time sanderianum was rediscovered).

Sandies remained a "tough to grow" species until fairly recently. So I expect that it will become more popular as easier line bred cultivars become available.


----------



## Rick (Jun 30, 2013)

I've see lots of roths at shows, but I have yet to see a sanderianum at a show, or the judging center I frequent.

The award history is a reflection of rarity in collections (since very few could keep a sandi alive for any significant length of time), rather than popularity with judges.


----------



## NYEric (Jun 30, 2013)

Ummm..ever read Orchid Fever? You will see a hint of why Paph sanderianum was so elusive as a parent. Import difficulties, location, etc.


----------



## emydura (Jun 30, 2013)

If you took away the long petals, sanderianum is a dog of a flower. Terrible dorsal and awful shoulders in the petals. Breeding will improve that to some degree but never to the extent where it will match rothschildianum for shape and flower size (petal length aside).


----------



## goldenrose (Jun 30, 2013)

Good topic Orchid Boy!
We've had some good comments already, here's my 2 cents worth.
Roths seem to mature/bloom faster than sandies. Culture is suppose to be pretty similar other than light. Chuck Acker once told me he felt sandies were not difficult to grow but people killed them with kindness trying to protect their investment. I have both and both are very slow, if I had it to do over, I would wait to be able to afford to purchase a larger plant.
Sandies are probably more expensive due to them not being as popular - supply & demand.
Sandies are not seen at judging centers or shows, why? Timing of blooming is always a factor for any orchid but their long petals don't stay pristine for long & they're hard to transport without damage.
Considering all of the above, the sandie hybrids are probably more popular than the species.


----------



## Justin (Jun 30, 2013)

Agree with David, aside from the cool petals the flowers are pretty bad. Don't get me wrong, i enjoy growing sanderianum and they are really cool to see in flower, but they have nothing on the symmetry, color, and majestic stance of a roth flower.

Also, sand is a pretty poor hybridizer. With a few exceptions, sand makes the form of almost any other flower it is hybridized with worse. It washes out the color too. As a hybridizer roth makes pretty much every other flower better.

But of course beauty is in the eye, and like i said i do like sands but for me they are more of a "curiosity" orchid not necessarily something grown for its sublime beauty like roth.


----------



## dodidoki (Jul 3, 2013)

If you ask me, I can tell that I love better roths. But sanderianum is almost equal...don't know. But in fact that roths are many more easier to grow plants, faster, not so sensitive to diseases eg. So I think they are more popular because of this.

I have three roths, they are very big, full of roots and leaves. I have a BS sanderianum, grows fine but very sloooow.


----------



## slippertalker (Jul 3, 2013)

A well grown rothschildianum is simply majestic, more so than any species in the genus. Sanderianum is lovely but the primary virtue is the long, long petals. If roth is the king, sanderianum is the graceful queen.


----------



## Fabrice (Jul 3, 2013)

Sanderianum have an incredible flower but rothschildianum have something more for me. But I can't explain it.

I like a lot sanderianum. I love rothschildianum.

@slippertalker: King and graceful Queen, I like this point of view!


----------



## Chicago Chad (Jul 3, 2013)

> Ummm..ever read Orchid Fever?


 Yep. It's fantastic. 



> If you took away the long petals, sanderianum is a dog of a flower. Terrible dorsal and awful shoulders in the petals. Breeding will improve that to some degree but never to the extent where it will match rothschildianum for shape and flower size (petal length aside).


 Ouch. Some people, judges especially, will always prefer symmetry, and in many flowers I do as well. But there are also species that do not lend themselves to this sort of critique. sangii and sanderianum are some that come to mind. I think by trying to line breed these traits in or out of a species, it also causes the plant to loose something. When its gone it is hard to put your finger on it, but there is certainly an artificial look to it for me. Please check Ayreon's Roth post for an excellent example.

I would prefer any 'wild' sanderianum, twisted dorsal and all over any roth, whether it was extensively line bred or not. It all comes down to what you think makes a good flower. 

Hypothetically, if sandies did not have the petal length that they do, I would not be interested in them either.


----------



## emydura (Jul 4, 2013)

Chicago Chad said:


> Ouch. Some people, judges especially, will always prefer symmetry, and in many flowers I do as well. But there are also species that do not lend themselves to this sort of critique. sangii and sanderianum are some that come to mind. I think by trying to line breed these traits in or out of a species, it also causes the plant to loose something. When its gone it is hard to put your finger on it, but there is certainly an artificial look to it for me. Please check Ayreon's Roth post for an excellent example.
> 
> I would prefer any 'wild' sanderianum, twisted dorsal and all over any roth, whether it was extensively line bred or not. It all comes down to what you think makes a good flower.
> 
> Hypothetically, if sandies did not have the petal length that they do, I would not be interested in them either.



Don't get me wrong. I'd love to have a flowering size sanderianum in my collection. I was just pointing out that it will never have the symmetry of a roth, hence will never receive the high number of awards it achieves. Rothschildianum is perfection in every sense whereas sanderianum just has amazing long petals. 

The only real way to greatly improve the shape of sanderianum is to include species such as roths and then backcross it with sanderianum. Hopefully some will achieve sanderianum petal length's but with much better shaped flowers. But then it is no longer a species.


----------



## jtrmd (Jul 4, 2013)

Looks like a hybrid to me,but its a keeper either way.It looks too good to be sanderianum,because most of them are just plain ugly! I divided mine down to a little growth and traded a plant I grew for over ten yrs to bloom.When it did I wanted to barf.LOL!I think those Kemp Towers I bloomed and trashed were better looking.


----------



## The Orchid Boy (Jul 4, 2013)

Thanks for all your points of view.

Can you really "improve" a flower through breeding? Maybe to our eyes it may look better but plants produce flowers to attract pollinators not to be awarded symmetry awards. If I was a pollinater flying, I think sanderianum blooms would catch my eye before rothschildianum. Those long petals swaying and shimmiering in the breeze... pollinaters don't care about symmetry. I agree that some flowers don't need symmetry as much as others. And Ayreons roth... well, it looks sick, I really don't care for it at all.


----------



## Trithor (Jul 4, 2013)

With the amount of spots that 'graceful queen' has, she may need a good dermatologist!


----------



## emydura (Jul 4, 2013)

The Orchid Boy said:


> Thanks for all your points of view.
> 
> Can you really "improve" a flower through breeding? Maybe to our eyes it may look better but plants produce flowers to attract pollinators not to be awarded symmetry awards. If I was a pollinater flying, I think sanderianum blooms would catch my eye before rothschildianum. Those long petals swaying and shimmiering in the breeze... pollinaters don't care about symmetry. I agree that some flowers don't need symmetry as much as others. And Ayreons roth... well, it looks sick, I really don't care for it at all.



I don't understand your reference to pollinators. Breeders are trying to improves the flowers so they are more attractive to our eyes, not the pollinators. In fact, improving the flowers could even make them less attractive to pollinators.

As for Ayreons roth. That clone looks like the old style that has not been selectively bred and hence retains the 'wild' look. So there you go. You prefer the roths that have been improved by selective breeding. oke:


----------



## ehanes7612 (Jul 4, 2013)

supposedly sanderianum crossed with other sanderianum is difficult to get seed. Sam had a run on flasks a decade ago but i havent seen much breeding from him lately or anyone else..and from what i understand from that breeding a decade ago..produced mediocre results...i bloomed out a few and they were okay...just nothing i would write home about


----------



## Justin (Jul 4, 2013)

The strain Leo was selling were better, and darker. I flowered one that was really good.

http://www.slippertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=27529&highlight=sanderianum+humidity


----------



## The Orchid Boy (Jul 4, 2013)

emydura said:


> I don't understand your reference to pollinators. Breeders are trying to improves the flowers so they are more attractive to our eyes, not the pollinators. In fact, improving the flowers could even make them less attractive to pollinators.
> 
> As for Ayreons roth. That clone looks like the old style that has not been selectively bred and hence retains the 'wild' look. So there you go. You prefer the roths that have been improved by selective breeding. oke:



I was refering to roths vs. sandies, about which one would seem to me to attract more pollinaters. Anyway.....

So maybe I'm picky about roths, I'm less picky about sanderianums. Now I think I'm really going to start ameateur breeding sanderianums, I'm young and have got my whole life ahead of me to do it. The pictures I've seen of Leo's sandies are a lot nicer than others I've seen and I have one now.


----------



## eggshells (Jul 4, 2013)

The Orchid Boy said:


> I was refering to roths vs. sandies, about which one would seem to me to attract more pollinaters. Anyway.....
> 
> So maybe I'm picky about roths, I'm less picky about sanderianums. Now I think I'm really going to start ameateur breeding sanderianums, I'm young and have got my whole life ahead of me to do it. The pictures I've seen of Leo's sandies are a lot nicer than others I've seen and I have one now.



Different species attract different pollinators. It is the way of the plant to not compete with other plants for pollinators attention. Paph rothschildianum, I think resembles grasshoppers egg in the staminode to attract its pollinators. While sanderianum.. I dont know? Maybe uses their long petals to flag whatever its pollinator. I have also read somewhere that sanderianum secretes sweet dew or something.


----------



## The Orchid Boy (Jul 5, 2013)

I know that it was first thought it had long petals to drag on the ground for insects to crawl up, then later they saw that on the cliffs the petals usually didn't touch the ground so it was thought that flying insects or birds(?) were the pollinaters and that the long petals swayed and shimmered in the breeze to attract them.


----------



## The Mutant (Jul 6, 2013)

Leaving the pollinators out of the picture :wink: , I prefer roths instead of sandies. I like the dark reddish colour on the pouch, and the cheeky expression they have (they always look like they stick their chins out, asking for trouble). Sandies do have their petals, but those are not enough for me to want to try and grow one (I'm a mere windowsill grower after all, I don't think I'll be able to flower a single roth even, so why try something that's even slower?).


----------



## emydura (Jul 6, 2013)

ehanes7612 said:


> supposedly sanderianum crossed with other sanderianum is difficult to get seed. Sam had a run on flasks a decade ago but i havent seen much breeding from him lately or anyone else..and from what i understand from that breeding a decade ago..produced mediocre results...i bloomed out a few and they were okay...just nothing i would write home about



The Taiwanese seem to be putting out a lot of hybrids with sanderianum on both sides - eg. PEOY x sanderianum and MK x sanderianum. I have a large Angel Hair x sanderianum that comes from Taiwan. As you say, you may need to flower a lot to get a good one.


----------



## Leo Schordje (Jul 11, 2013)

Well, over the years I have bloomed a few of both.  and hands down, rothschildianum is the EXHIBITION plant. Wow, a good roth can be spotted in a display from 300 feet away. It is a bold flower, great presentation. 

Sanderianum is lovely, don't get me wrong, but often it is "looking at the ground" where the dorsal does not stand vertical, rather hoods over, the tawny colors are not as bold as a roth, and transporting a sanderianum in bloom is almost impossible to get it to a show or judging center with the petals intact. David and Justin are right, the flowers without the petals are almost as boring as a randsii. Rare, yes, a bit tougher to grow, yes. But it is not the imposing show peice that a rothschildianum is. 

When I stake a rothschildiaum stem for display, the stake only needs to stabilize the presentation, or maybe pull the stem backward a little bit, less than 15 degrees would be typical. Bolt upright presentation is the usual state. A proud flower. 

When I stake a sanderianum I have to pull the stem up usually something on the order of 45 degrees. Sandies want to hang their heads, too shy for the exhibit hall. Add the narrow dorsal, etc and you can see why people seem to gravitate toward roths. 

If I had to reduce my collection to 5 species, roth would be on the list, not so sure about sanderianum. Micranthum and a purpuratum would make the list.

But since I have the luxury of a little more space than that, I have a dozen mature sanderianum, and 3 mature roths. I have been picking up roth seedlings again. I definitely need more, so I can see one in bloom more often.


----------

