# Mastigion putidum



## Ron-NY (Aug 9, 2008)

Mastigion is genus in the subsubtribe of Bulbophyllinae. The flower is 10.5" tall


----------



## paphioboy (Aug 9, 2008)

That's a very long 'tail' its got there...  Does putidum actually refer to this ornatissimum-like species or does it refer to fascinator..? I'm a bit confused as I've seen pics of plants of fascinator labelled as putidum... TQ..


----------



## Rick (Aug 9, 2008)

paphioboy said:


> That's a very long 'tail' its got there...  Does putidum actually refer to this ornatissimum-like species or does it refer to fascinator..? I'm a bit confused as I've seen pics of plants of fascinator labelled as putidum... TQ..



It is confusing. This flower is usually referred to as appendiculatum or ornatissimum. Putidum is usually referenced to something that looks like fascinator. Dr Nassir claims that there is a "true" putidum, and it looks just like a fascinator except it's larger. I don't think there are enough morphometric differences in these guys to justify more than two species, but there seems to be allot of hair splitting and old names floating around in this group.

These are very cool flowers though.


----------



## SlipperFan (Aug 9, 2008)

...and then there is breviscapum, which also looks like fascinator & putidum to me...http://portersorchids.com/Images/Bulb_breviscapum.jpg

But I don't always know about labeling. I really wish someone would come out with the definitive Bulbophyllum Alliance book. There are too many contradictions out there right now.

For instance, the ornatissimum we have on Porter's web site looks nothing like Ron's putidum. Unfortunately, I see I have to fix the link before I can send you there. Tomorrow, maybe.


----------



## Yoyo_Jo (Aug 10, 2008)

Cool flower, whatever it's called... :clap:


----------



## JeanLux (Aug 10, 2008)

great flower Ron!!! the plant that I have (or had ?  ) as ornatissimum has its flowers on a shorter stem, and the 'tail' is much shorter! Jean


----------



## Ron-NY (Aug 10, 2008)

The breakdown was to 5 different species. Most have been moved back to Bulbo, based on Kew. 
* Mastigion appendiculatum
* Mastigion fascinator
* Mastigion ornatissimum
* Mastigion proboscideum
* Mastigion putidum


----------



## SlipperFan (Aug 10, 2008)

http://portersorchids.com/Images/Mastigion_oratissimum.jpg


----------



## Ron-NY (Aug 10, 2008)

Here is my fascinator...shorter spike and sepals wider flower with more coloration and dodoflatchies The labellum is quite different. There are enough morphological differences for these not to be the same species.


----------



## Rick (Aug 11, 2008)

There's no doubt your putidum is different from fascinator Ron, but how is it different from appendiculatum? In Siergerist's book the differences are pretty subtle. "Clavate versus lamellate palae, and triangular versus oblong petals".

Based on the who named what first premise putidum is the oldest name (1862) in the present Mastigion complex. Appendiculatum was named separately in 1901. Garay, Hamer & Siergerist apparently reaffirmed the various species names when they created Mastigion in 1994. Subsequently, putidum may be more correct to use than appendiculatum or ornatissimum.:evil::evil:

I'm not sure where Nasser came up with his version of putidum (although it seems to match what's in Jay's Encyclopedia I believe) since he's such a big fan of Garay. But he was pretty adamant that he knew putidum when he saw it, and treated it like it was the long lost member of the Mastigion complex.

Anyway more taxo crap based on hair splitting morphology with no basis in population demographics.


----------



## paphioboy (Aug 11, 2008)

Ron, I agree that's what a fascinator should look like..  Mine looks just like that..

Rick, if I'm not mistaken, appendiculatum is the smaller species compared to putidum... My plant of appendiculatum flowers at a small size, and the flower is also quite small. It also has very short lengths of rhizome between the pbulbs. Compared with a division of 'putidum' which I once had (has since gone to orchid heaven..:sob, the 'putidum' is a larger plant with larger flowers (about 6 inches long) and has a length of rhizome between pbulbs.. not sure if all that is what actualy differentiates both species, though..


----------



## Ron-NY (Aug 11, 2008)

appendiculatum is a question that I am not prepared to answer. I have one but have not bloomed it yet. I will reserve my opinion until the point that I can compare it to the other species.


----------



## Rick (Aug 11, 2008)

paphioboy said:


> Ron, I agree that's what a fascinator should look like..  Mine looks just like that..
> 
> Rick, if I'm not mistaken, appendiculatum is the smaller species compared to putidum... My plant of appendiculatum flowers at a small size, and the flower is also quite small. It also has very short lengths of rhizome between the pbulbs. Compared with a division of 'putidum' which I once had (has since gone to orchid heaven..:sob, the 'putidum' is a larger plant with larger flowers (about 6 inches long) and has a length of rhizome between pbulbs.. not sure if all that is what actualy differentiates both species, though..



That's what I've heard too, but given how variable the size of flowers on a given plant can be, I don't think that's a good qualifier for making it a whole new species. It could just be the difference between a highland vs lowland form of the same thing.


----------

