# New paph species canhii



## baodai (Apr 27, 2010)

http://www.hoalanvietnam.org/Article.asp?ID=681

It is supprising me that everyone want to put their name on this article, I wish they can wait to find out more info about this plant before officially publish it ...
Here is one of the unknow info: location ... the article wrote "Distribution locally endemic to northwest Vietnam" that is large area, It could be in Lao also .... I can grow them from my backyard and when it flowers I can say it is from my location? ... 
(By Leonid V. Averyanov, Olaf Gruss, Canh Chu Xuan, Loc Phan Ke, Dang Bui and Hiep Nguyen Tien), I can tell you this, These getelmen don't see this plant on the wild. It is discorvered by a wild collector (who name is not even mention on this article). Canh, Huyen and Phong bought it from market

"Ecology Mixed coniferous and broad-leaved primary forests on rocky limestone at elevations about 4,920 feet (1,500 m) above sea level. In shady places at the base of vertical limestone cliffs on deep soilsrich in humus near tops of ridges." This is a joke, They don't know where it's discorvered but they know it Ecology. 
I can't wait for the official publish in AOS
Finally, I'm glad i live in USA where i can speak freely about this issue and not afraid someone put me in jail for my freedom of speak
BD


----------



## Hakone (Apr 28, 2010)

It is right, may be the plant grow in Laos . He buy the plant from market Ha Noi


----------



## labskaus (Apr 28, 2010)

Interesting comments, Baodai. The article suggested to me that Canh actually discovered the plants in the wild.
I wonder if somebody else is also preparing a manuscript with a desription of this "species", otherwise I wouldn't know why the authors would publish this article prior to the offcial publication. Worried to loose a race?
I also share your feelings about this article beeing a bit pre-mature. We know the great field work Averyanov did in the past and with him as an author I would have expected more than guesswork in this article.
If I was peer-reviewing this article, I would have a few remarks to the authors.
If Baodai is right and the authors haven't seen the habitat, they shouldn't mention it. From experience and the available data I still think there is a good chance this plant is a hybrid. The authors discard this possibility just too easily. Also, the flower looks distoretd to me. I would wish for more flowers to base a description on. Finally, the authors aren't able to place their new species in any section/subgenus of Paphiopedilum. This is a strong argument towards my previous points. Hey guys, have you ever got hold of one plant of your new species? Maybe a piece of leave material? Ever heard of DNA analysis?  Not happy.


----------



## valenzino (Apr 28, 2010)

Bodai,Canh said you he bought it on Market?Or are just voices going around?
Cause if you are shure about what you are sayng its ok,if not,its not nice to say he is a lier...and all things you are sayng can be false...and infos on the article can be true cause if canh have found the plant he have seen the habitat and is better not to say the exact location to protect someway from foreigners(or even locals that live outside te country) that send collectors for bussiness...
About article I agree with Carsten that right thing to do is DNA before official description.The article is usefull to the peoples that described it to have a first name and to better promote further researches....unfortunately will be also usefull to some peoples to do some underground bussiness....


----------



## John Boy (Apr 28, 2010)

My gosh!!!

how ugly is that!? Doesn't look like a new species, but like an accident to me...

But that's just me!


----------



## Ernie (Apr 28, 2010)

I am certainly intrigued by all this. And, as much as I respect all of you (Baodai, Hakone, Labskaus, Valenzino, etc who seem to have first hand knowledge about this entity), I thinkwe are sort of at the mercy of the authors unless someone can say without a doubt otherwise. Maybe Olaf will speak up. Hopefully. I agree that we'd expect a new species to fit into one of the established sections. Shoot, maybe it's in a previously unknown section? I do think the leaves and flower could suggest an intersection hybrid between some Barbata and a Brachy or Parvi? Apparently, there are more than just one of these, so it's not an isolated freak. 

As far as DNA goes (I'll just say "molecules", since all phylogenetic analyses don't automatically mean DNA)... molecules don't simply get shoved into a computer and some software then spits out an identification. Humans do the actual analysis, or have command of software that does, so even with molecular info, the determination on what to call the taxon with those molecules is biased. Molecules, chosen properly, have the potential to indicate realtionships and some shared material between species could indicate a hybrid, but whoever does the analysis can also interpret the data as "it's different than all other Paphs, it was collected, it's a new species/nat hybrid." In this case, i'd defer to age old species concepts (which are always contested)- if a _stable _natural population is present and is sustainable with naturally available pollinators (spatially and temporally) to produce fertile offspring, pow- new species. Plants are weird though with the whole interbreeding thing. x wenshanense is a perfect example- mom's version of Conco-bellatulum, BUT we know x wenshanense can also be back crosses of either parent in endless combination only limited by evolutionary time- it's evolving before our eyes, and ages from now, it might stabilize. Maybe not. My personal feeling on this weirdness as it applies to horticulturally valuable taxa (ie Orchids) is that: if it is a phenotypically stable natural population and produces fertile offspring over time, it might be best to recognize it at the specific rank _unless _we know exactly what the parents are and in what proportion. Why??? When someone eventually breeds with this creature (they'd probably be really drunk to do so), it will be convenient to track is hybridization that way. Simple. Think of all the messes we have now with moquettianum, anitum, leucochilum that are/were once varieties of other species BUT lend tangible traits to offspring. RHS is now elevating some of these to species rank and there's a historic mess of confusion. If moquettianum was always moquettianum (IMO as it should've been) and not glauco var. moq, we'd have better record of its breeding history. Pinocchio would be Pinocchio and not Clouds Pink... whatever (prim x moq) is. 

Bottom line is we need to know more about this beast before we attack the authors or question its rank. Who needs a Master's/PhD project??? 

Just my $0.02. 

-Ernie


----------



## Roy (Apr 28, 2010)

Interesting, I saw a pic of this plant posted in a forum some time ago and suggested it was a new species and I was politely told I didn't know what I was talking about. Funny about that isn't it.


----------



## baodai (Apr 28, 2010)

Ernie,
Let's do all the basic first before we can move forward with DNA etc ...
To me location of the species is important, because we can find out what other paph's growing with it. (Does this make DNA comparasion easier?).
You wrote "Bottom line is we need to know more about this beast before we attack the authors or question its rank". The article are ready published and there are incorrect or untold on this article, I made comments base on this article. 
Valenzino,
We bought some plants from the same patch with Huyền, Cảnh and Phong. So, I can almost guarantee that this plant was not discorvered by Cảnh, Unless (Leonid V. Averyanov, Olaf Gruss, Canh Chu Xuan, Loc Phan Ke, Dang Bui or Hiep Nguyen Tien) went to the location themself, (then it is still discovered by the wild collector, I wish they mention his name on this article, I witheld the name and make more comments when they officially published the article on AOS) ... Where is the habitat pictures if they went to the site??
BD


----------



## labskaus (Apr 28, 2010)

Ernie said:


> Bottom line is we need to know more about this beast before we attack the authors or question its rank.
> -Ernie



Ernie, I just believe the authors might need to know more about the beast themselves.

I fully agree with you that any DNA analyses should be carried out in conjunction with other analyses, and that proper data interpretation is crucial.

Roy might be right and we're seeing a new species here, but afaik we're still talking about one funny flower and a couple of non-blooming plants. That's a bloody small sample for a floral analysis. I mean, it was Averyanov who published Paph. hiepii. History repeating? I hope I'm wrong.


----------



## Lance Birk (Apr 28, 2010)

What Ernie said.

Same for Baodai, ... thanks


----------



## shaw (Apr 28, 2010)

i dun blame author for this issue and ignore the other detail...... look at how plants are being reg at RHS. whom would have the right first? they would all rush through it till the dust is settle ... then the next author would do the corrections and so on so for name start to surface it's the normal practice...
example - paph markianum or would u call it paph tigeranum ? fowlie or HK versions?


----------



## Hakone (Apr 28, 2010)

baodai said:


> Ernie,
> Let's do all the basic first before we can move forward with DNA etc ...
> To me location of the species is important, because we can find out what other paph's growing with it. (Does this make DNA comparasion easier?).
> You wrote "Bottom line is we need to know more about this beast before we attack the authors or question its rank". The article are ready published and there are incorrect or untold on this article, I made comments base on this article.
> ...



There is about 20 plants


----------



## Ernie (Apr 28, 2010)

Baodai,

I agree with you. We have the article linked above, correct or incorrect. Until something more is published, we're stuck. 
If someone argues that a specimen claimed to have been wild-collected was actually bought at market, I find that interesting, but still need more info. All else equal, unless I was there, published info is correct until proven otherwise. Still, plenty of peer-reviewed info is garbage. 

-Ernie


----------



## NYEric (Apr 28, 2010)

Man, the truth is relative. We all should know this. This is the same as Pk except that the issue of crossing borders w/ the plant is not at issue, as far as I know. If the collector doesn't want attention by being credited that's their option. But, if the credit is sought Canh, would have difficulties w/ any dispute w/out specific location info. Just my 1cent.


----------



## Ernie (Apr 28, 2010)

Yeah, Eric, but I also see the point of protecting the site to prevent overcollection. That would also negate his corner on the market.  Both sad but very true. 

-Ernie


----------



## Bolero (Apr 29, 2010)

Sorry looks like you beat me to it.


----------



## tenman (Apr 29, 2010)

I wonder if is does end up being a species, what it'll be named when a proper publication is issued as the one in the link is invalid as there is no drawing, an absolute requirement not superseded by the inclusion of photos. 

Paph.buttugliensis?


----------



## kentuckiense (Apr 29, 2010)

tenman said:


> I wonder if is does end up being a species, what it'll be named when a proper publication is issued as the one in the link is invalid as there is no drawing, an absolute requirement not superseded by the inclusion of photos.
> 
> Paph.buttugliensis?


At the end of that webpage it states that it will be published in the May 2010 issue of Orchids, presumably with all of the necessary items required for a valid species description.


----------



## tenman (Apr 30, 2010)

kentuckiense said:


> At the end of that webpage it states that it will be published in the May 2010 issue of Orchids, presumably with all of the necessary items required for a valid species description.



Oh, darn! And I had such a good name picked out for it!


----------



## Ernie (Apr 30, 2010)

To overanalyze for silliness...

I sort of think it would correctly be *Paph. buttugliense *per some rule of Latin grammar, but am not entirely sure.  Most (all?) Paphs with that etymology have -ense (malipoense, vietnamense, hainanense, celebense...), right? 

Anyway, the tenman's name would imply it *originated from *an ugly butt, which may or may not be true. Are markets (or jungles) called ugly butts in Vietnam and China?  Maybe _Paph. buttuglioides_ would be better? Translated roughly a 'Paph _resembling_ an ugly butt'. ? :rollhappy: So this is what's called a formal *emmendation* to tenman's original description.  

Is a botanical sketch mandatory for plants??? My experience is in the Animal Code (which ended formally circa 2001, but I still consider it a hobby I can't devote enough time to) in which a drawing was not mandatory, but certainly encouraged! Of course, the newest code might say I'm wrong, or my memory could be bad. Most _Corydoras_ descriptions do have drawings, but some newer ones described from aquarium specimens do not- sometimes having a picture of a cute little catfish swimming in an aquarium of neon tetras with the type locality as New Jersey, USA (_Corys _are from South America). 

-Ernie



tenman said:


> I wonder if is does end up being a species, what it'll be named when a proper publication is issued as the one in the link is invalid as there is no drawing, an absolute requirement not superseded by the inclusion of photos.
> 
> Paph.buttugliensis?


----------



## Candace (Apr 30, 2010)

I think Paph. buttugliense is a perfect name for it.


----------



## John Boy (Apr 30, 2010)

How would you feel about:
*Paph. horrificatum* or Paph. quasimodoum?


----------



## Candace (Apr 30, 2010)

Hmmm. Now you're giving me too many good choices. I think any of those would aptly describe the flower. :evil:


----------



## cxcanh (Apr 30, 2010)

Dear all.

Thank you very much for your concern and your commended.
As a person who involve directly in this species I have some commend as bellow:
- Most of you not living in Vietnam so you might not know well a bout Vietnam context related to orchid as specially Paph species.
- A good lesson learn from Paphiopedilum helenae in the past as some or most of you should know already so the location I did not gave to any one (except the people I trust and the some authorities - I know detail location from my GPS)
- This is a freedom forum so everyone can post whatever they think but you should think careful before you post because that is your image to everyone.
Finally.. wish all of you all the best and have more interesting orchids.

Canh Chu Xuan


----------



## baodai (Apr 30, 2010)

cxcanh said:


> Dear all.
> 
> Thank you very much for your concern and your commended.
> As a person who involve directly in this species I have some commend as bellow:
> ...


Cảnh, Wellcome to Slippertalk forum,
Can you post pictures of this orchid from the wild? Can you also tell us what other paphs growning around it, or the nearest paph? I don't think this would give away GPS location.
- Can you also commnet on Huyen and Phong, they are claimed that they are purchased this plant with you from the market !!!
Thanks,
BD


----------



## cxcanh (Apr 30, 2010)

This link show some of my trip to see orchid.

http://www.rv-orchidworks.com/orchi...-photo-dairy-my-forest-trips-see-orchids.html

@baodai: I gave to Phong and Huyen each of them 2 plan from that trip and that is two different species but the other still not flowering so we still don't know what it is. 
A lot of orchid trader ask me where I found it, I told them that I bought it from market, they even ask me more detail but what I told them is I don't remember. What do you think if they know where it come from???
I share my information with all our member in my orchid club and ask for their advice and we agree not sent any more photo to anywhere until it official recognize.


----------



## nikv (Apr 30, 2010)

I think it is wise to keep the habitat as secret as possible for as long as possible. Whether people consider this species to be attractive or not, it's habitat is still threatened with destruction and overcollecting. Good luck to Canh Chu Xuan and his associates!


----------



## valenzino (Apr 30, 2010)

baodai said:


> We bought some plants from the same patch with Huyền, Cảnh and Phong. So, I can almost guarantee that this plant was not discorvered by Cảnh,
> BD





baodai said:


> - Can you also commnet on Huyen and Phong, they are claimed that they are purchased this plant with you from the market !!!
> Thanks,
> BD



Here something dont like or dont understand,first you bought with them .......
and after them said to you...

Is absolutely better not to say with wich Paph it grows because collectors know the areas where other plants grows and so can trak back the location asking to locals about peoples movements and other species colonies...also collectors searching this new plant,if dont find,will collect lot of other species to compensate....


----------



## baodai (Apr 30, 2010)

valenzino said:


> Here something dont like or dont understand,first you bought with them .......
> and after them said to you...
> 
> Is absolutely better not to say with wich Paph it grows because collectors know the areas where other plants grows and so can trak back the location asking to locals about peoples movements and other species colonies...also collectors searching this new plant,if dont find,will collect lot of other species to compensate....



Valenzino,
There is diff between bought with them and bought the same patch, we bought my plants the same patch at later day.
I will wait to see the pictures of this plant live on wild on AOS
DB


----------



## NYEric (Apr 30, 2010)

As usual, we may never know the truth.


----------



## SlipperFan (Apr 30, 2010)

cxcanh said:


> This link show some of my trip to see orchid.
> 
> http://www.rv-orchidworks.com/orchi...-photo-dairy-my-forest-trips-see-orchids.html
> 
> ...



Welcome to Slippertalk, Canh. It's good of you to join and give a a different perspective on this plant. I agree that you should keep it's origins a secret -- we humans have too much history of destroying and decimating original habitats.


----------



## paphioboy (May 1, 2010)

Thank you so much for sharing that link, Canh.. Its amazing to see so many species growing in one forest.. and to think of how many undescribed species there are yet to be found and introduced into cultivation...


----------



## JeanLux (May 1, 2010)

Yes, thanks for the link!!!! Most impressive on-site pictures and very nice landscapes!!!! Jean


----------



## Pete (May 1, 2010)

*WOW* thank you *SO MUCH* for linking us to all those photos you posted on the other site. truly incredible. we really appreciate it!! your photos are most excellent


----------



## SlipperFan (May 1, 2010)

I finally took the time to follow your link, Canh. The photos are beautiful. When my husband and I travelled to China, I learned that one of my favorite spots on earth was the Li River and the beautiful karst mountains all around. Thank you for helping bring back those memories.


----------



## NYEric (May 2, 2010)

Wow! Thanx for posting the link of your trips and welcome from NYC.


----------



## ldhuyen (May 3, 2010)

Dear BAODAI

Originally Posted by baodai 
- Can you also commnet on Huyen and Phong, they are claimed that they are purchased this plant with you from the market !!!
Thanks,
BD

Who are you?
I do not know who you are!


----------



## NYEric (May 3, 2010)

I know. :ninja:


----------



## quietaustralian (May 12, 2010)

*Cao Bằng, thác Bản Giốc*



cxcanh said:


> This link show some of my trip to see orchid.
> 
> http://www.rv-orchidworks.com/orchi...-photo-dairy-my-forest-trips-see-orchids.html



I must say I enjoy a mystery and a little intrigue but as you have some heavy weights of the Vietnamese Paph. World supporting this new species I wish you well.

I agree with some that its not the prettiest Paph in the world but it is interesting. I’d hate to see it collected out of existence. I recognise the areas in the photos you supplied and have been lucky enough to travel there myself on numerous occasions.

Every Vietnamese person would recognise the water fall but may not know of the other locations in the pictures. I know 2 “commercial orchid gathers” (plunderers of VN natural history) in the area so be careful even with these pictures. 

Do you have shop in Hà Nội or a private collection?

tạm biệt


----------



## labskaus (May 12, 2010)

Welcome Canh!

Thanks for joining in, and your pics are great! I'd love to learn more about this Paph.


----------



## cxcanh (May 12, 2010)

Thank you all for your replied and your commended.
Wishing you all the best and have more nice orchids.


----------



## Hien (May 14, 2010)

Welcome to the forum Canh & Huyen.
Quietaustralian, I am surprised to see an Aussie who is so good in vietnamese, what a pleasure to welcome you to the forum as well .
One question. I thought Thac Ban Gioc were stolen from Vietnam by mainland China already ? or were they only able to steal part of it ?
By the way, nobody should look down on this vietnamese orchid and remark that it is ugly.
The vietnameses have a saying for such a similar sentiment.
"ugly wife is mine alone, beautiful wife will run around with any guys in town"


----------



## SlipperKing (May 14, 2010)

funny Hien


----------



## cxcanh (May 14, 2010)

@Hien: Ban Gioc waterfall have one part now claim by China only not all.


----------



## quietaustralian (May 16, 2010)

Hien said:


> Quietaustralian, I am surprised to see an Aussie who is so good in vietnamese, what a pleasure to welcome you to the forum as well .
> One question. I thought Thac Ban Gioc were stolen from Vietnam by mainland China already ? or were they only able to steal part of it ?
> By the way, nobody should look down on this vietnamese orchid and remark that it is ugly.


Chào Hien,
My Vietnamese is very poor but I guess I must continue to try. Thác Bản Giốc belongs to both China and Vietnam. I think China is more interested in Hà Giang, Quần Đảo Trường Sa and Hoang Sa.



Hien said:


> The vietnameses have a saying for such a similar sentiment.
> "ugly wife is mine alone, beautiful wife will run around with any guys in town"



I think that saying must be universal as my father told me the same thing when I was young.
Hien, are you in Vietnam or the US?


----------



## Hien (May 17, 2010)

quietaustralian said:


> Chào Hien,
> My Vietnamese is very poor but I guess I must continue to try. Thác Bản Giốc belongs to both China and Vietnam. I think China is more interested in Hà Giang, Quần Đảo Trường Sa and Hoang Sa.
> 
> 
> ...



Anyone who could put the correct accents on the vietnamese words is pretty good with the language ( I , on the other hand always manage to put the accent in the wrong location with english, and that is really embarrassing, since english has only one accent)

I think it was my indian co-worker who told me a joke about the imperialistic Mainland China. 
During a world diplomatic gathering, the leader of China criticized US for invading other countries, and mentioned that China never involved in other countries' businesses & internal affairs.
Impressed by the statement, all the presidents clapped their hands.
The US head honcho was intrigued & and asked for advice from the Chinese Premier how he managed to accomplish that. 
The Premier smiled and said: oh, of course we never send any troop outside our country, we just call the other countries our provinces :rollhappy::clap:

I haven't been back to VietNam for a long time now.


----------



## NYEric (May 17, 2010)

Hien said:


> The Premier smiled and said: oh, of course we never send any troop outside our country, we just call the other countries our provinces



The People's Democratic Republic takes exception to your statements and the implied debasements! Our troops will be there soon to help you compose your apology!


----------



## Hien (May 17, 2010)

NYEric said:


> The People's Democratic Republic takes exception to your statements and the implied debasements! Our troops will be there soon to help you compose your apology!




Ouch, Re-education camp :sob: Enough learning already, I am too lazy to go back to school.
Please send the helpers to my co worker so that he could do a self criticism on his erroneous sense of humor


----------



## NYEric (May 18, 2010)

Hien said:


> Ouch, Re-education camp :sob: Enough learning already, I am too lazy to go back to school.
> Please send the helpers to my co worker so that he could do a self criticism on his erroneous sense of humor


The Peoples' Democratic Republic takes joy in your enlightenment and will gladly send the 5th army education group to assist in the enlightenment of your co-worker. :clap:


----------

