# What do you get when you cross a Chihuahua with a St. Bernard?



## paphreek (Oct 26, 2008)

Looking for comments on this cross: Paph (Barbi-Doll X Honeycomb Creek 'Butterdish' AM/AOS) Unfortunately, this is not the best blooming of Honeycomb Creek, but at least you get an idea of the cross.


----------



## Roy (Oct 26, 2008)

Excessive plants to dispose of.


----------



## biothanasis (Oct 26, 2008)

I like more the smallaer one, but they are both beautiful!!!!!!


----------



## Heather (Oct 26, 2008)

I dunno, I think the colors are right on and it would bring the size of the plant down. Go for it. Honeycomb is beautiful. It's been so long since I've had a blooming plant, I'd probably buy one of those!


----------



## Hera (Oct 26, 2008)

I'd be happy to grow some out for you:drool:

I't looks like a nice combo. They're both made of butterscotch.


----------



## SlipperFan (Oct 26, 2008)

I'm wondering what your goals are? Smaller, round flower (teacup)? Smaller plant? Just curious, as the colors are so close and the sizes are so different.


----------



## PaphMadMan (Oct 26, 2008)

Seems like a logical combination to me - potentially larger fuller flowers than Barbi-Doll, smaller plant than Honeycomb Creek, predictable color range (though I would hope to see a few that show more of the fairrieanum coloring and pattern), and a percentage that go to the compost heap of course. Go for it.


----------



## goldenrose (Oct 26, 2008)

I think it's worth a shot!


----------



## Drorchid (Oct 26, 2008)

I think it is a good idea and you will get some nice teacup complex Paph's, but unfortunately it will probably be a dead end, as your Barbi-Doll is probably a diploid, and your Honeycomb Creek is probably a tetraploid. Your resulting hybrid will be all triploids, and probably all sterile. It would be better to try to remake your Barbi-doll and convert them to tetraploids, and then cross it to you Honeycomb Creek.

Robert


----------



## paphreek (Oct 26, 2008)

Drorchid said:


> I think it is a good idea and you will get some nice teacup complex Paph's, but unfortunately it will probably be a dead end, as your Barbi-Doll is probably a diploid, and your Honeycomb Creek is probably a tetraploid. Your resulting hybrid will be all triploids, and probably all sterile. It would be better to try to remake your Barbi-doll and convert them to tetraploids, and then cross it to you Honeycomb Creek.
> 
> Robert



Thanks to all for your comments. I look forward to more. 

My intention here was to produce smaller complex Paphs with hopefully some fairrieanum influence. I have done the cross, and it produced some seedlings, maybe 50 or so.

Robert, we have discussed this issue before and I believe that you have hit on a major stumbling block, assuming that some of the flowers turn out well in this highly speculative cross.

Three questions then come to mind:
1. In the case of triploids, could offspring be produced by sib crossing two of the triploids?

2. Are all complex Paphs tetraploids? If not, do you have any ideas as to how far back one must go in breeding lines to find diploid parents?

3. Is this their ploidy the reason why such plants as Hellas 'Westonbirt' and Winston Churchill 'Indomitable' continue to be such prolific breeders?


----------



## paphioboy (Oct 26, 2008)

That's a very gorgeous complex... I simply love the colour on Honeycomb Creek...!! :drool: :drool: :drool:


----------



## labskaus (Oct 27, 2008)

Leaving the ploidy discussion aside and looking just at the outcome of this cross: look at In-Charm Gold and In-Charm Topaz, both made with helenae and a large green and both look surprisingly good. Which way did you make the cross, Ross?
Looking at the pics at In-Charms website, it appears that the pod parent has greater influence on shape and plant size, In-Charm Topaz (helenae x Pacific Shamrock) being more on the helenae side and In-Charm Gold (Emerald Magic x helenae) a tad bigger and rounder on average. I've got an In-Charm Gold in bud, it still is a very compact plant with a leaf span of about 15cm.

You should get some nice ones out, Ross. Wether or not you'll be able to breed on with them, I don't know.

Best wishes, Carsten


----------



## SlipperKing (Oct 27, 2008)

Ross, By your intro the cross is BD X H, right? I bet you'll get beefed up Barbi-Dolls.


----------



## PaphMadMan (Oct 27, 2008)

paphreek said:


> Thanks to all for your comments. I look forward to more.
> 
> My intention here was to produce smaller complex Paphs with hopefully some fairrieanum influence. I have done the cross, and it produced some seedlings, maybe 50 or so.
> 
> ...



From a general plant breeding standpoint rather than any particular experience with paphs, triploids are rarely completely sterile, and the large number of potential seeds per capsule in orchids should help give some viable seed. Triploidy messes up pollen viability more than seed viability, so use the triploid as the pod parent with pollen from a diploid or tetraploid. Crossing 2 triploids is a very long shot. 

Also in theory, the triploids could be converted to hexaploids, and crossed with diploids to produce tetraploids.


----------



## paphreek (Oct 27, 2008)

labskaus said:


> Leaving the ploidy discussion aside and looking just at the outcome of this cross: look at In-Charm Gold and In-Charm Topaz, both made with helenae and a large green and both look surprisingly good. Which way did you make the cross, Ross?
> Looking at the pics at In-Charms website, it appears that the pod parent has greater influence on shape and plant size, In-Charm Topaz (helenae x Pacific Shamrock) being more on the helenae side and In-Charm Gold (Emerald Magic x helenae) a tad bigger and rounder on average. I've got an In-Charm Gold in bud, it still is a very compact plant with a leaf span of about 15cm.
> 
> You should get some nice ones out, Ross. Wether or not you'll be able to breed on with them, I don't know.
> ...



The Barbi-Doll was the seed parent.


----------



## Drorchid (Oct 27, 2008)

paphreek said:


> Thanks to all for your comments. I look forward to more.
> 
> My intention here was to produce smaller complex Paphs with hopefully some fairrieanum influence. I have done the cross, and it produced some seedlings, maybe 50 or so.
> 
> ...



To answer your questions:

1. The chance to get triploids to breed is very slim. I have only had some luck breeding with triploids, and if I do get some germination, usually I get very low germination. One of the few example's of a fertile triploid is Paph. insigne 'Harefield Hall'. If you cross it to a tetraploid, actually a lot of the offspring will be tetraploid's as well. If you do want to breed with triploids, you probably will get more offspring when you backcross it to a tetraploid versus a diploid or another triploid, so I would backcross your offspring on to another tetraploid complex Paph. A problem if you do get triploids to breed that most of the offspring themselves will be aneuploids and those will also highly likely be sterile (only once in a while you will get a pure tetraploid or diploid).

2 and 3. Yes, most complex Paph's are tetraploids, or near tetraploids (aneuploids which means they may be missing one or two chromosomes). Plants like Hellas 'Westonbirt', Winston Churchill 'Indomitable' and Paph. Skip Bartlett 'White Pepper' are probably all pure tetraploids, and that is why they are such good breeders. If you have a complex Paph that is a poor breeder it is probably a triploid or an aneuploid. You probably have to go way back to find diploids. I am guessing at the time (in the early 1900's) they unintentionally were selecting for tetraploids. First of all they had the largest flowers, and secondly they were able to breed with them and get another generation.

Robert


----------



## Drorchid (Oct 27, 2008)

PaphMadMan said:


> From a general plant breeding standpoint rather than any particular experience with paphs, triploids are rarely completely sterile, and the large number of potential seeds per capsule in orchids should help give some viable seed. Triploidy messes up pollen viability more than seed viability, so use the triploid as the pod parent with pollen from a diploid or tetraploid. Crossing 2 triploids is a very long shot.
> 
> Also in theory, the triploids could be converted to hexaploids, and crossed with diploids to produce tetraploids.



And I agree with PaphMadMan, if you do breed with triploids, you should probably use them as pod parents versus pollen parents. And yes theoretically if you would convert triploid Paphs to hexaploids they should be fertile again. Unfortunately no one has yet been successful in making hexaploid Paphs.

Robert


----------



## paphreek (Oct 27, 2008)

Thanks, again, Robert, Kirk, Carsten, and all for you insight.


----------



## Leo Schordje (Oct 27, 2008)

Drorchid said:


> And I agree with PaphMadMan, if you do breed with triploids, you should probably use them as pod parents versus pollen parents. And yes theoretically if you would convert triploid Paphs to hexaploids they should be fertile again. Unfortunately no one has yet been successful in making hexaploid Paphs.
> 
> Robert



Hey Robert, Ross and rest of the gang, 
Nice discussion. I mostly understand the hort breeding science quoted in this thread. Being a detail orientated nudge that I am by professional training (Quality Control) I just thought I would point out a detail left out of this discussion. :evil: Please take this as a good humored twist of yer ole tail. 

That detail is: "Mostly that you guys really don't know squat about the actual chromosome counts for most of the Paphs that were just discussed." oke: All this is conjecture from the breeding record. As conjecture, I think you are pretty much right on, but I'd like you guys to admit you are just guessing.

How many cell squashes have you ACTUALLY done? How many guard cells have you measured? Now I do know at O.L. Jerry and you and your predecessors have done some work, but your sample is limited mostly to the plants you have on the premises. I doubt you have squashed more than dozen or so total Paphs and Phrags combined. Am I right? I have done a couple cell squashes myself, and know how long they take, that they are tedious to do and how inconclusive they can be. Especially spotting the aneuploid missing only one or two chromosomes from a full polyploid complement. That is a bunch of little blobs & squiggles to count. Hard to get a whole cell's worth in focus. You really take the snapshots and circle and count the chromosomes in a meaning ful sample of cells? For dozens of plants? Major Grunt Work is you have my hats off to you for your tolerance of tedium. And good eyesight and fine motor control. All traits I lack. 

For virtually all (but maybe 10 or 20) of the complex Paphs used in history we know NOTHING about what their chromosomes look(ed) like except by conjecture from the breeding record and observation of phenotype (the pretty picture). 

Working from classic plant breeding theory, the conjecture in the thread above is pretty much on the mark. BUT, the plants don't read the books, Ross likely has not karyotyped his breeding clones, anything can happen. 

Statements like; "there are no breeding hexaploid Paphs", are not supported negatively or positively - as there is no data. (or very, very little) This same statement was made about Phals, and at then they did work up a few and _voila_, they found that some strains of complex white Phalaenopsis are indeed hexaploid. 

Similar about the often repeated "pod parent govern's plant size". There is a reasonable logic to the ascertion, but there IS NO DATA PUBLISHED in orchids, where reciprocal crosses were raised side by side and measured. We have some "vague but true" observations on individual plants. But that is not quite the same as solid data. I have heard at least one PhD molecular geneticist say the plant size theory was hogwash, that the size will not be dependant on which was pollen or pod parent. There will be no difference in average size between recipocal cross made using the same clones as parent. There is no data one way or the other on this one, just conjecture. 

All in all, everything said above is probably a good guess, but we who think we know something about plant breeding, should be men enough to admit, we are largely guessing here, because we don't have much actual data on these clones to go beyond the educated guess. 

Which means for Ross, go ahead, try your crosses, you might get lucky. And for "Dr. Orchid" Robert, as his paycheck depends on good guesses about the breeding outcomes, so when he makes a guess that a certain cross is not going to yeild enough to seed to cover lab expenses, he is likely guessing right. I love the conjecture, but you guys should throw in the fact that we are guessing about this every now and then. 
Cheers
Leo


----------



## Drorchid (Oct 27, 2008)

Thanks Leo for your input. You are correct that I have not done too much chromosome counts for Paph's so I cannot support with what I said with actual facts, so I will be a man here, and say I was guessing....... But unlike with Paph's, I have done a lot of chromosome counts in Phragmipediums, and I think what I have observed in Phragmipediums can also apply to Paphiopedilums. For the record I probably have done about 50 different squashes of root tips. My masters Plant Breeding Thesis dealt with Cytogenetics, so I got pretty good in observing chromosomes and counting them.

What I was stating to Ross was from my own experience as a breeder, and talking to other growers and breeders. My stated observations were a mere general rule of thumb (you will always get exceptions). I do think however that most complex Paphs ARE tetraploids and the fact that some breed better than others (like Winston Churchill or Hellas) points to that they are real tetraploids with a complete set of chromosomes, while bad breeders are most often triploids (complex crossed back to a diploid species) or they are aneuploids (they have almost the same number of chromosomes as a tetraploid, but over generations have lost some chomosomes) which makes them hard to breed with.

And I do think that Ross should go ahead and make the cross, and he may even get some interesting offspring. I just wanted to warn him that it probably would be a dead end, and gave him probable reasons why. I have made similar crosses and mine were dead ends too.

PS next time I do root squashes, I will count chromosomes of a bunch of complex Paph's so I can back up my statements with my own factual observations! Maybe I will discover a new hexaploid! 

Robert


----------



## SlipperKing (Oct 27, 2008)

WOW Leo, what a mouth full! OK, I admitt when I said Ross will get a beefy Babi-Doll I was guessing!


----------



## Leo Schordje (Oct 27, 2008)

Glad you guys get that I'm poking fun, I am every bit as guilty as anyone of making predictions with great certitude from vapor thin facts. When I do it discussing orchids, most of my friends let me get away with it. When it comes to politics, history or anything else - my friends beat me up and kick me out of the bar. I'm considering giving up drinking. I'll never quit prognosticating. 

I really do appreciate the work and expertise that Robert and other serious professionals put into breeding, and all the amatuers, Ross, myself and others who do breeding on the side.


----------



## Leo Schordje (Oct 27, 2008)

Drorchid said:


> For the record I probably have done about 50 different squashes of root tips. My masters Plant Breeding Thesis dealt with Cytogenetics, so I got pretty good in observing chromosomes and counting them.



My hat's off to you - 50 is huge. You certainly have squashed more orchids than any other human I've heard of. For those of you who occasionally pop off a question - hey what's the chromosome count of this or that - think about it - it is tedious, pains taking work. Doing 50 was more than enough for a Masters Degree, that is a good measure of how many actually are done out in the hort industry. I'd be buggers after the third squash.

(I do recognize the Masters wasn't for the counts, it was for the skill with which the data was interpreted).


----------



## paphreek (Oct 27, 2008)

I love the excellent discussion! For my part, being relatively inexperienced and completely uneducated, I listen to as many people with experience and knowledge as possible, and then make my own decisions based on my circumstance. Not needing to produce commercially viable crosses with consistency gives me a certain amount of freedom to experiment and that is what I am doing.

Concerning big plant or small plant for seed bearing, I seem to have had more success producing seed when using the small plant as the seed producer. I have no objective proof of this. Maybe it is simply because I try more crosses this way.


----------



## Hera (Oct 27, 2008)

Thanks to all for the educational discussion. I'm not sure that I understand much of it, but its interesting to get into the heads of the professionals.


----------



## Yoyo_Jo (Oct 27, 2008)

Hera said:


> Thanks to all for the educational discussion. I'm not sure that I understand much of it, but its interesting to get into the heads of the professionals.



Ditto, and never again will I ever pop off a question like, "hey, what's the chromosome count of so and so orchid..." :rollhappy:

Holy crap, I gotta go back and read this thread again, it's scrambling my brain. You guys are awesome!


----------



## Roy (Oct 28, 2008)

Hera said:


> Thanks to all for the educational discussion. I'm not sure that I understand much of it, but its interesting to get into the heads of the professionals.



I like this thread also BUT the whole outcome from any hybridist is " Do It & see what happens " 
An understanding of ploidy etc is useful and whether one plant or another breeds well and what clone is better than another and which ones are more dominant. The best one can wish for in breeding is to pick plant A & cross it with plant B with a thought in mind of what he/she would like to achieve in the progeny. A good read of the RHS names & parentages and a look through the awards register usually highlights which plants are producing the best offspring and work from there.
IMO, the best knowledge can be gained from the efforts of past breeders. Depending on what you want to achieve, many times *similar* crosses have been done before. If the results are close to what you are trying to achieve go for it or ask yourself, "would you buy this plant?", if the answers no, look for something else to cross.


----------

