# oncidium sotoanum (new species)



## cnycharles (Dec 6, 2010)

you might not recognize the name of this newly-named oncidium species. for quite a while it was known in horticulture as 'oncidium ornithorhynchum'... turns out that when o. ornithor... was first described, the wrong picture was attached to the sheet (oops)! turns out that onc. orn. is a yellow and brown flower (go figure, right?), and the pink species that everyone knew didn't have a name. so, it was given the name onc. sotoanum. I like the name orntihorhynchum even though I can't spell it properly and the new name is kind of boring, though I guess we're all lucky they didn't call it warscezwithecianuuum or something like that! 

anyhow, I originally had one of this species from rice's orchids and it was nice and grew well. it eventually got some soft brown scale and I tried the 'rubbing alcohol treatment'. well, turns out that oncidiums like this don't appreciate having the whole plant sprayed with alcohol, and after the liquid ran down into the roots it decided that it wanted to part company with me  . 

I eventually found someone in the binghamton orchid society (stos) who had also purchased a plant of this from jim rice so I got a division from him. some say that this species can have either a very nice or a very soapy fragrance; thankfully this has a wonderful fragrance! the flowers are pointed around a bit, but I have it pretty close to fluorescent lights on a plant cart so the buds pointed themselves right up at the bulbs. there are more spikes coming out now that are pretty short, but I credit this to being so close to the lights. 

I read in the baker culture sheets that this species would do well in a shallow pan so the pot has lots of semi-hydro pellets in the bottom and a shallow layer of media on top. a new member of our cnyos club krum sotirov used to be an orchid grower at kew gardens, and he said that this species would do well in a basket which seems to line up with what the bakers listed for this species (moist but airy conditions around the roots)

I left my tripod at clark's house after the eagle trip, so I have to take pics handheld with higher iso and all that. so, these pics are a little fuzzy






whole plant view





flower group





flower closeup


----------



## JeanLux (Dec 7, 2010)

cool story!!! I have this one as ornithorhynchum with lots of mealys and co habitating it  !!! Jean


----------



## Erythrone (Dec 7, 2010)

Interessant!!! Thanks for sharing.

I wanted to update my data base, but I didn't remember the true name of this plant (someone told me the true name at the last society meeting, but I forgot!!).


----------



## etex (Dec 7, 2010)

Very interesting story and culture info. Good to know some oncidiums don't like alcohol treatments. 
Cool plant and blooms!


----------



## paphioboy (Dec 7, 2010)

Another name change..?  Nice plant btw, Charles... On another note, does anyone know if the real ornithorhynchum is in cultivation?


----------



## Shiva (Dec 7, 2010)

cnycharles said:


> you might not recognize the name of this newly-named oncidium species. for quite a while it was known in horticulture as 'oncidium ornithorhynchum'... turns out that when o. ornithor... was first described, the wrong picture was attached to the sheet (oops)! turns out that onc. orn. is a yellow and brown flower (go figure, right?), and the pink species that everyone knew didn't have a name. so, it was given the name onc. sotoanum.
> 
> Charles! Where did you get the name change? I went to the RHS site and every other orchid sources I know and could not find the change. Both names exist but they carry no synonym.


----------



## cnycharles (Dec 7, 2010)

I first heard about this on the orchid guide digest forum a few weeks ago when someone was looking for literature for ornithorhynchum; they came back with the new name and the brief story. I did a google search for onc. sotoanum and found that the name change was proposed in lankesteriana in january 2010 and it was also mentioned afterwards in the aos forum. When googling there are other references written in spanish, but it looks like they all reference lankesteriana. It probably hasn't made it around alot yet though I did see a catalogue that had sotoanum listed for sale

jean, I acquired this division from someone who told me that his plant would usually be clean until it started to flower, and then the brown soft scale would emerge and cover the plant no matter how often he sprayed it. my plant has a few mealybugs that showed up when it started spiking (sigh)


----------



## Shiva (Dec 7, 2010)

I'm really getting annoyed by all those name changes. I thought that by going with DNA analysis there would be more order in orchid classification. Now, I think it's more of a mess than before. Next time I have to put new tags on my plants, I'll go back to the old names like Blc, Lc and Sc. And laelias will remain lealias and Lycastes, lycastes. Enough already! And you can forget about changing the name on my ornithorynchum. If they screwed up in the past, shame on them. :viking:


----------



## Erythrone (Dec 7, 2010)

Shiva, I think that DNA analysis is not the reason for the change. What I understand is that the plant first described as ornithorynchum was not the pink oncidium we know!!


----------



## Shiva (Dec 7, 2010)

Erythrone said:


> Shiva, I think that DNA analysis is not the reason for the change. What I understand is that the plant first described as ornithorynchum was not the pink oncidium we know!!



I know that, but why not retrofit the sotoanum to the description of that flower and do the same for ornithorhynchum? Why do we have to replace a name already well known by one that almost nobody has ever heard before. What's the point? Nothing is lost! The people who gave the names still get recognized. It all begins to look like a shell game to me.


----------



## biothanasis (Dec 7, 2010)

Very nice!!!!!


----------



## SlipperFan (Dec 7, 2010)

Thanks for the growing info, Charles. Now I think I know why the ones I've tried to grow don't like me.


----------



## paphreek (Dec 9, 2010)

Shiva said:


> I know that, but why not retrofit the sotoanum to the description of that flower and do the same for ornithorhynchum? Why do we have to replace a name already well known by one that almost nobody has ever heard before. What's the point? Nothing is lost! The people who gave the names still get recognized. It all begins to look like a shell game to me.



That's because taxonomy is an anal-retentive sport! :evil:


----------



## Shiva (Dec 9, 2010)

Thanks Ross! I don't feel alone in my wrath anymore. :rollhappy:


----------

