# Phrag.....?



## troy (Apr 14, 2016)

Is wallisii the same as warsciwizianum?


----------



## NYEric (Apr 14, 2016)

Phragweb.


----------



## Rob Zuiderwijk (Apr 14, 2016)

It is quite confusing. Current status of names as far as I know:

Phrag. caudatum
Phrag. exstaminodium
Phrag. lindenii
Phrag. popowii (Some say Phrag. humboldtii depending on view.)
Phrag. warszewiczianum (note spelling)


Phrag. popowii used to be Phrag. (caudatum var.) warscewiczianum (note spelling)
Phrag. warszewiczianum used to be Phrag. (caudatum var.) wallisii

All the best,

Rob.


----------



## MaryPientka (Apr 14, 2016)

oy!


----------



## NYEric (Apr 14, 2016)

Rob Zuiderwijk said:


> I
> Rob.



Hi Smitty! Thanks for the response.


----------



## troy (Apr 14, 2016)

Lol... china dragon x wallisii aka warsciwizianum has been awarded & named already, instead of my name (ira hayes) it is some stupid bullshit lol... dammit!!!


----------



## NYEric (Apr 14, 2016)

What!? Did you make the cross?


----------



## troy (Apr 14, 2016)

I didn't make the cross.. with permission I could have named it


----------



## SlipperFan (Apr 14, 2016)

Rob Zuiderwijk said:


> It is quite confusing. Current status of names as far as I know:
> 
> Phrag. caudatum
> Phrag. exstaminodium
> ...



And warszewiczianum used to be wallisii, right? If not, is it back as a variety of caudatum?


----------



## NYEric (Apr 14, 2016)

troy said:


> I didn't make the cross.. with permission I could have named it



Yes, but very rarely does someone who went through the trouble to pollinate, store, sow, replate, replate, flask, compot, grow..a new cross and then let someone else name it.


----------



## troy (Apr 14, 2016)

Anything is better than the name they gave it lol.... marilyn made the cross, I sent her an email with a picture she wants one with all of them open, I asked her if it has been named she hasn't got back to me yet


----------



## Rob Zuiderwijk (Apr 15, 2016)

SlipperFan said:


> And warszewiczianum used to be wallisii, right? If not, is it back as a variety of caudatum?



Hi Dot,

Not quite sure what you mean.

The entity/taxon that was known as _Phrag_. _warscewiczianum_ or sometimes _Phrag_. _caudatum _var. _warscewiczianum _before the reshuffling of names is now called _Phrag_. _popowii _ or _Phrag_. _humboldtii_ depending on which view you follow.

The entity/taxon that before the shuffling was known as _Phrag_. _wallisii _or sometimes _Phrag_. _caudatum _var. _wallisii _now goes by the name of _Phrag_. _warszewiczianum_.


I hope this answers you question.

Rob


----------



## Bjorn (Apr 15, 2016)

NYEric said:


> Yes, but very rarely does someone who went through the trouble to pollinate, store, sow, replate, replate, flask, compot, grow..a new cross and then let someone else name it.



Well, I was permitted (actually encouraged) by Alfredo Manrique twice
Of course, I was the first that made them bloom


----------



## labskaus (Apr 15, 2016)

I thought the central american entity called popowii used to run as humboldii (for a short time) and (caudatum var.) warszewiczii.
The pale small-flowered south american form commonly known as wallisii also carries the name warszewiczianum.


----------



## NYEric (Apr 15, 2016)

troy said:


> Anything is better than the name they gave it lol.... marilyn made the cross, I sent her an email with a picture she wants one with all of them open, I asked her if it has been named she hasn't got back to me yet


I guess she didn't want your name on it! oke:



Bjorn said:


> Well, I was permitted (actually encouraged) by Alfredo Manrique twice
> Of course, I was the first that made them bloom


Doesn't everyone have a Phrag named after them!? :evil:


----------



## Cheyenne (Apr 15, 2016)

labskaus said:


> I thought the central american entity called popowii used to run as humboldii (for a short time) and (caudatum var.) warszewiczii.
> The pale small-flowered south american form commonly known as wallisii also carries the name warszewiczianum.



Exactly, I think this is getting more confusing than it need to be popowii Was always warscewiczii. I have seen it called warszewiczianum but that was rare, a mistake in itself and mostly due to not paying attention to spelling detail. That is how I always new it and the name changes did not seem so confusing.


----------



## troy (Apr 15, 2016)

Marilyn wants to register it, although it has already been awarded & named under wallisii.....?


----------



## SlipperFan (Apr 15, 2016)

Thanks Rob. That's what I thought, but I got confused when I saw on your site under species, caudatum var. wallisii.


----------



## NYEric (Apr 16, 2016)

troy said:


> Marilyn wants to register it, although it has already been awarded & named under wallisii.....?


Let her know it's already registered.


----------



## Rob Zuiderwijk (Apr 17, 2016)

@Dot
The old PhragWeb web site has not been updated for a loooong time and is as a consequence not up to date when it comes to the name changes of the taxa in the section _Phragmipedium_. When I made the last changes to PhragWeb the discussion was already going on full, but I failed to keep up. I won't bother you with the details about why I stopped updating the web site.
The day before yesterday I uploaded the first, sort of preliminary, version of my new web site which I've been working on. At the moment I'm busy entering a framework of names of both natural taxa and hybrids, but it's far from complete at the moment. The part concerning the _Phragmipedium _species is relatively up to date what the names are concerned, and there you can find the names and synonyms as they are at the moment i.m.h.o., based on the literature I've read.
If interested go to www.slipperiana.info (or simply use www.phragweb.info) and see for yourself.

@Carsten, Cheyenne et al.
The confusing discussion concerning the naming of the taxa in the section _Phragmipedium_, and especially the Meso American taxon has been going on for over a decade. At the moment it seems to have settled down a bit. During the period of discussion there were sort of three 'camps' with their own views on things; Robert Dressler et al., Guido Braem et al. and the late Eric Christenson. Of these three groups the 'Dressler-group' proposed all sort of names, including _humboltii_, _exstaminodium _subsp. _warszewiczii _and all sort of varieties en subspecies. Eric Christenson (although I haven't been able to get my hands on his article(s)) seems mainly to have proposed the use of the name _Phrag_. _warszewiczii_. Guido Braem et al. say that in the confusion in the old days the Meso American taxon has never been described and propose the new name _Phrag_. _popowii_. There have been numerous articles with discussions on the subject in various orchid journals and scientific papers. All in all there are two names that seemed have survived at the moment, _Phrag_. _popowii _and _Phrag_. _humboldtii_.

Recently the R.H.S. announced that they have asked Robert Dressler et al. to research the material again and come with an answer that would solve this matter once and for all. And how surprising..., they came up with the name _Phrag_. _humboldtii_. The R.H.S. now accepts _humboldtii _as the correct name and uses that one in it's register of hybrids. The funny thing is that they still seem to use the name of _Phrag_. _wallisii _for the other taxon involved in the name changing.

P.S. sorry for the long story.

Rob


----------



## naoki (Apr 17, 2016)

The interpretation of article 46.2 of International Code of Nomenclature by Poplin & Dressler (2011, 2nd para p.168) seems to make sense to me even though I don't have complete understanding of nomenclature rules. I asked about this in his Facebook group, and Guido said that it doesn't apply because the "manuscript" by Warszewicz doesn't exists. I don't know if the letter (a form of manuscript) is required to exist by IAPT. I'm guessing that in some species named long time ago, there are cases where the original article or letter describing the species didn't survive.


----------

