# Phrag. brasiliense



## Drorchid (Oct 6, 2006)

Phrag. brasiliense was described by myself and Olaf Gruss, and was published in the Orchid Digest (Vol 67(4)).

According to Jerry Fischer, he had received two unlabeled plants from Ron Ciesinski of Taylor Orchids, Michigan, and according to Jerry these plants had been purchased over 20 years earlier by John Fitch from Margaret Ilgenfritz who had originally imported them from Brazil. 

We had labeled them all these years as Phrag. vittatum.

For a picture of Phrag. vittatum go to:

http://phragweb.info/phragmipedium/species/photos/images/rt_vittatum_8.jpg

When they came into bloom, they were clearly not Phrag. vittatum, but something different. As Jerry believed that they were a wild species native to Brazil, we wanted to give them a correct name. We contacted Olaf Gruss who is one of the leading authorities on Phragmipedium species. After sending a whole bunch of photos he agreed that it was indeed a new species. I asked at the time if he thought that it might be a hybrid (natural or man made) but he did not think so. He compared it to all the existing hybrids that he knew of, and still could not identify it. As I have a background in Plant Taxonomy, me and Olaf agreed to write a paper on it and to describe it.....and so Phrag. brasiliense was born....

After the paper was published people emailed me (including Guido Braem), and stated that Phrag. brasiliense was not a true species, but actually a man made hybrid between Phag. sargentianum and Phrag. pearcei known as Phrag. Patti MacHale (or synonym Phrag. La Moya). I even heard that Ron Ciesinski had made this hybrid, or that he had bought them from someone who had made this hybrid, and then they got mislabeled....

see following link for a picture of Phrag. Patti MacHale: http://www.slipperorchids.info/phragprimaries/PhragPattiMacHale1.jpg

Now Jerry is still convinced that it is a natural species, as when he went to England he was looking in an old Botanical book by Pabst and Dung, (Orchidaceae Brasilienses), and saw a color plate that was labeled as Phrag. caricinum. He was convinced this was the elusive Phrag. brasiliense. See picture from Papst and Dung:







close up:






I agree that it is not Phrag. caricinum see the following link for a picture: http://www.portersorchids.com/Images/Phrag_caricinum.jpg

but if you compare it to a picture of Phrag. vittatum:

http://phragweb.info/phragmipedium/species/photos/images/rt_vittatum_8.jpg

I think this picture is probably Phrag. vittatum, and not what we call Phrag. brasiliense.

Now this leads us back to Phrag. brasiliense. Following are some pictures from our plants:
















Now I am going to refrain from saying what I think it is.....natural hybrid .....man made hybrid....or true species......I want you guys to discuss what you think Phrag. brasiliense is ......

Robert


----------



## Marco (Oct 6, 2006)

as for me  don't know. don't care. looks nice. i like .  Thanks for the pic doc


----------



## silence882 (Oct 6, 2006)

Great question!

I would guess it's probably a man-made hybrid between Phrag. vittatum and Phrag. sargentianum. I suppose it could be a natural hybrid since both of the parents are from Brazil. However, their distributions haven't currently been found to overlap, so a natural origin is a bit of a long shot.

The bloom has the auricula (pointy projections along the opening of the lip) characteristic of Section Lorifolia, but they're poorly developed. I would think that's a result of having one parent from Section Lorifolia. I am guessing it's Phrag vittatum because of the undulate petal margins and vittatum's distribution in Brazil.

This pic shows the auricula on longifolium, another member of Section Lorifolia:
http://www.slipperorchids.info/phragspecies/Phraglongifolium3.jpg

The other parent would have to be from either Section Himantopetalum or Platypetalum. I am guessing sargentianum because of the intense red petal tips and the rounded shape of the pouch. Also, sargentianum has a fat staminode that matches up nicely with the pics of brasiliense.

--Stephen


----------



## Jon in SW Ohio (Oct 6, 2006)

Bottom pics do look like a hybrid to me...almost like a smaller more colorful Sorcerer's Apprentice.

Has OL carried a lot of vittatum hybrids in the past? I have a plant from them I got about 7 years ago that definitely has some vittatum in it. It's the only plant I've ever got mislabelled from OL, and I'm very glad it was.

Jon
________
Buy extreme q


----------



## Drorchid (Oct 6, 2006)

Jon, when I was doing some research to write this thread I came across the following posting from the Slipper Orchid Forum:


Jon in SW Ohio
06-05-2005, 10:09 PM
I ordered a Phrag. Mem. Dick Clements from Orchids Limited years ago in a large order and it never looked quite right. When it finally bloomed, I thought it was vittatum although not an exact match. I am waiting for it to bloom again now that chapadense and brasiliense have been described. I e-mailed them when it bloomed as to its possible ID but never got a reply. I always suspected it was an undescribed species and when the OD had a description for brasiliense from Orchids Limited, my jaw dropped.

I will be sure to share it with you all for opinions when it blooms as it is a large multi-growth plant. I have never had any problems growing it along side all my other phrags.

Jon

I assume you were referring to that plant. Has it ever bloomed for you again? I would like to see some pictures. We sibbed both plants that we now call Phrag. brasiliense a few years ago (They were still labeled as Phrag. vittatum at the time) and got a bunch of seedlings to grow. I am thinking that your mislabeled plant was one of these seedlings. We have some "true" Phrag. vitatum's as well (Although I have never seen them bloom), but thus far I know, we don't have any hybrids made with Phrag. vittatum.

Robert


----------



## Jon in SW Ohio (Oct 6, 2006)

Yup same plant. Still no blooms, but they were much more green than the pics of brasiliense above. Almost like how I imagine (vittatum x boissierianum) would look.

Jon
________
PORTABLE VAPORIZER


----------



## Drorchid (Oct 6, 2006)

We did notice some variation in the seedlings; some were more green and some were deeper red in color......to me proof that we were dealing with a hybrid.....in the next generation you get seggregation, and some seedlings look more like one parent and some more like the other.....

Robert


----------



## Heather (Oct 6, 2006)

How large are the plants? I would think if sargeantianum was involved, it would be obvious in the size of the plants as well. Then again, I don't know how large vittatum gets.


----------



## Drorchid (Oct 6, 2006)

I found some pictures of two seedlings that we made from the original parents that we got. It shows the variation in size and color of the flowers.











Robert


----------



## Drorchid (Oct 6, 2006)

Heather said:


> How large are the plants? I would think if sargeantianum was involved, it would be obvious in the size of the plants as well. Then again, I don't know how large vittatum gets.



I would say the plants are pretty large now; they have a leaf span of about 20 inches across, and the Flower spikes are about 25 to 30 inches tall.

Robert


----------



## SlipperFan (Oct 6, 2006)

Drorchid said:


> I found some pictures of two seedlings that we made from the original parents that we got. It shows the variation in size and color of the flowers.


Amazing! They look like two different hybrids.

The biggest difference I can see between your photo of brasiliense and vittatum is the inside of the pouch. That's the place I can see a resemblance to Patti McHale.

Interesting that our (Porter's Orchids) caricinum doesn't look much like the one in the illustration, either.


----------



## ORG (Oct 7, 2006)

Dear Robert,
before we described _Phrag. brasiliense_, we discussed also the possibility of a natural or artificial hybrid.
Now some year were gone, but I think there are no new informations, that it would be necessary to change the decision that it is a distinct species.
Most of critics based only on speculations, because the hybridzation with _Phrag. vittatum _is also unknown today. There exist only some hybrids but they are not often to find in the collections.
When we decided to describe _*Phrag. brasiliense *_as species we had also the possibility to control the cross between _longifolium _and _vittatum _(*Phrag. Arthur*) and the cross between _lindleyanum _and _vittatum _(_*Phrag*_*. Hochgern*). My friend has both in culture and I could see them in bloom. They are realy different from _Phrag. brasiliense_.

It is very clear tat it is no _Phrag. vittatum_, the leaves of this species are so different, that the determination is no problem.

Best greetings

Olaf


----------



## Ron-NY (Oct 8, 2006)

The pic of Phag. sargentianum and Phrag. pearcei is the Patti MacHale in my collection. I have a closer pic of it and will locate it and post it here for comparison purposes. The spike tops out close to three feet tall and blooms sequentiually from about December through May. The second picture was of a previous blooming.


----------



## Drorchid (Oct 9, 2006)

Thanks Ron for the pictures. 

Even though there is some resemblence between Patti MacHale and Phrag brasiliense, based from your pictures they do look a little different. 

I am speculating that Phrag brasiliense may be either: 

1. a natural (or man made) hybrid between Phrag. sargentianum (or lindleyanum) and Phrag. vittatum. (Does anyone know if this hybrid has been made, or if there are any pictures of this hybrid?)

2. a hybrid between Phrag. sargentianum (or lindleyanum) and Phag. richteri 

3. a hybrid between Phrag sargentianum (or linleyanum) and Phrag. pearcei

Only #1 can be a natural hybrid as both species grow in Brazil (although as Stephen said their growing areas that we know of do not overlap)

Robert


----------



## Heather (Oct 9, 2006)

Found this at Phragweb:

Phrag. vittatum
x Phrag. besseae = Phrag. Vittabess
x Phrag. lindleyanum = Phrag. Hochgern
x Phrag. lindleyanum var. sargentianum = Phrag. Memoria Adele Bishop
x Phrag. longifolium = Phrag. Arthur
x Phrag. schlimii = Phrag. Stella
x Phrag. Eric Young = Phrag. Caroline Miller Ott

I didn't turn anything up on an image search for P. Memoria Adele Bishop.


----------



## Ron-NY (Oct 9, 2006)

Drorchid said:


> Thanks Ron for the pictures.
> 
> Even though there is some resemblence between Patti MacHale and Phrag brasiliense, based from your pictures they do look different.
> 
> ...


I agree


----------



## Drorchid (Oct 9, 2006)

Ron , one more question, you said your Patti MacHale always blooms from December to May. Do they always do that? Our "Phrag. brasiliense" started to bloom about 2 weeks ago.

Robert


----------



## Drorchid (Oct 9, 2006)

Heather,

Thanks for the info. Olaf sais he has seen the cross between Phrag. lindleyanum and vittatum (Phrag. Hochgern). I think that Phrag. sargentianum x vittatum (Phrag. Memoria Adele Bishop) will look very similar to this. According to Olaf sais Phrag Hochgern does not resemble Phrag. brasiliense at all. So I guess we can rule out posibility #1.

There is one more possibility:

It actually is a true species! I guess only time will tell. If someone ever discovers more of these plants in Brazil, than we will know for sure.

Robert


----------



## Drorchid (Oct 9, 2006)

I went into the greenhouse and noticed that both sargentianum, pearcei, and brasiliense were in bloom, so I had to compare the flowers. Here are pics:






sargentianum is on the left, brasiliense in the middle and pearcei on the right.

Here is a close up where you can see the staminodes and the inside of the pouches:






Based on these comparisons. I don't rule out that Phrag. brasiliense is sargentianum x pearcei. Both the staminode and the spots inside the pouch are intermediate between both species. What do you guys think?

Robert


----------



## Ron-NY (Oct 9, 2006)

Drorchid said:


> Ron , one more question, you said your Patti MacHale always blooms from December to May. Do they always do that? Our "Phrag. brasiliense" started to bloom about 2 weeks ago.
> 
> Robert


I can't say always, for come to think of it, I purchased it is October of 2000 and it was in bloom then. For the last 4 years it has bloomed early winter to late spring.


----------



## SlipperFan (Oct 9, 2006)

Drorchid said:


> Based on these comparisons. I don't rule out that Phrag. brasiliense is sargentianum x pearcei. Both the staminode and the spots inside the pouch are intermediate between both species. What do you guys think?t


When you place them in that order, it certainly shows the possibility. It would be fun to take sargentianum & pearcei into a morphing software, and see what happens 1/2 way between. Not that genectics are like that, but....


----------



## labskaus (Oct 17, 2006)

there seems to be an almost consensus that brasiliense is a hybrid of lindleyanum with something from the lorifolium section.

I do agree with Olaf that there is essentially no new information out and everything going on here is speculation. So, let's speculate  

Regarding brasiliense being Patty McHale: wouldn't pearcei heavily influence plant size and isn't Patty a much smaller plant than brasiliense? I'm just thinking of Phrag. Olaf Gruss, which is a pretty compact plant.

The unsimilarity of Phrag. Hochgern and brasiliense, which I can't state of because I haven't seen any photos of Hochgern or Mem. Adele Bishop yet: the original cross was lindleyanum x vittatum; how would the reverse cross vittatum x lindleyanum come out? Possibly more towards the pollen parent (read: more like brasiliense)? What exactly are the differences between Hochgern and brasiliense?

Robs Phragweb page has some nice pics of Phrag. Yu-Fu Liu and the unregistered sargentianum x caricinum. To me they look pretty similar to brasiliense, and caricinum would be a likely parent as much as richteri and more than pearcei. I don't know wether Dungs and Pabst recording of caricinum from Brazil was an error or if this species has been found in Brazil. Brazilians on this forum might know better.
Another candidate parent would be christiansenianum. Funny enough, this species has been in cultivation for decades and only recently been rediscovered in western Brazil. Hope there is an analogy to brasiliense.

On the other hand, brasiliense has a pretty large synsepal, and that would in my eyes lead to vittatum as one parent, wouldn't it?

I'm currently leaning towards a hybrid origin of brasiliense, but all options are still out. Looking forward to those F2 seedlings, they may tell us more.

Cheers, Carsten


----------



## Drorchid (Nov 14, 2006)

labskaus said:


> Another candidate parent would be christiansenianum. Funny enough, this species has been in cultivation for decades and only recently been rediscovered in western Brazil. Hope there is an analogy to brasiliense.



Hi Carsten,

Sorry I had not read your reply untill now, you had some good points, the more I think about it, I think that Phrag. christiansenianum may be a good candidate as one of the parents of Phrag. brasiliense (the other parent being Phrag. lindleyanum or sargentianum). If Phrag. pearcei would be one of the parents it does not explain the auricula (pointy projections along the opening of the lip) that Phrag. brasiliense has. Phrag. christiansenianum does have these auricula. Also the spotting pattern of Phrag. christiansenianum and the staminode fit as a possible parent. 

Olaf Gruss had some good pictures in his article in the Oct/Dec 2003 Orchid Digest of Phrag. christiansenianum. Olaf what do you think of this idea that Phrag. brasiliense is a natural hybrid of Phrag. christiansenianum x lindleyanum. I know that Olaf wrote that Phrag. christiansenianum is native to Colombia, but the exact location is unknown, but Carsten mentions that it has been found in western Brazil, can anyone verify that? If so it would be a good candiidate as a parent for phrag. brasiliense.

Robert


----------



## Braem (Nov 14, 2006)

*to be a hybrid or not to be a hybrid*

Robert, 

the fact that these are so very different (just look at the pouches) proves that we are dealing with a hybrid. Tell Jerry about Mendel's laws (and say hello to Yoko, Jason and the rest of the Orchids Limited crew for me.)

regards
Guido



Drorchid said:


> I found some pictures of two seedlings that we made from the original parents that we got. It shows the variation in size and color of the flowers.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Drorchid (Nov 14, 2006)

Hi Guido,

I will say hello to them. I agree with you that I think what we call Phrag. brasiliense is a hybnid (That is why I posted the picture above). The 2 questions that I have are:

#1 is it a a man made or a natural hybrid.?
Jerry is still 100% convinced that is came from Brazil, and was collected in the wild. Unitll recently he was also convinced that it was a true species, but now even he is leaning towards it being a natural hybrid. I can go either way regarding it being a natural hybrid or a man made hybrid...Untill recently I was leaning towards it being the same as Phrag. Patti MacHale (= pearcei x sargentianum), and thus it would be a man made hybrid as both parental species do not grow in the same location, but now that I have compared it to pictures of the man made hybrid Patti MacHale I dont believe this to be the case anymore.

#2 if it is a hybrid; what are the parents. If we can identify the parent species we can come one step closer to speculating if it is a man made or a natural hybrid (If both parent species do not grow in the same location, say one in Peru, and the other in western Brazil, we can rule out it ever being a natural hybrid). But for now I think we can only speculate what it is, untill someone actually discovers it in Brazil, but in the meantime it does not hurt to speculate...

Robert


----------



## ORG (Nov 14, 2006)

Dear Robert and also Guido,
I can agree more and more with your thoughts about brasiliense.
But let us wait for more plants in the future then we can make new speculations about the parents of Brasiliense.
Phrag. christiansenianum is really a possibility as one parent. Takase has shown some years ago a similar plant from Brazil which looks like. 
The other parent is easier, Phrag. sargentianum or lindleyanum var. sargentianum.

Best greetings

Olaf


----------



## Braem (Nov 15, 2006)

*brasiliense*

Robert, 

your question #1: I am putting my money on "man made" or lets call it anthropogenous :evil: 

I have information about the population of slippers at the site where _P. brasiliense _was allegedly collected. My people tell me that all the plants there are true _P. vittatum. _I don't know who sold the plants to Jerry ... and where that person got then from. Until we know that, there is nothing more to say. But I will repeat that as soon as I and some other people saw the picture, the unanymous opinion was (and is) that _P. brasiliense _is a hybrid, and as it has not been "found" anymore, it very probably is.

your question #2: ??? You know how difficult it is to tell the parentage of a hybrid. A wild guess would be that a plant of the _lindleyanum/sargentianum _group is involved. The twisted petals remind me of _P. vittatum._ Have the DNA done, and compare. It would not be the final proof, but it would give us an idea of what COULD be involved.

and remember Jerry also maintained for a very long time that _P. amazonica _was a good autonomous species.

Guido





Drorchid said:


> Hi Guido,
> 
> #1 is it a a man made or a natural hybrid.?
> Jerry is still 100% convinced that is came from Brazil, and was collected in the wild. Unitll recently he was also convinced that it was a true species, but now even he is leaning towards it being a natural hybrid. I can go either way regarding it being a natural hybrid or a man made hybrid...Untill recently I was leaning towards it being the same as Phrag. Patti MacHale (= pearcei x sargentianum), and thus it would be a man made hybrid as both parental species do not grow in the same location, but now that I have compared it to pictures of the man made hybrid Patti MacHale I dont believe this to be the case anymore.
> ...


----------



## Phrag-Plus (Nov 4, 2008)

Braem said:


> Robert,
> 
> the fact that these are so very different (just look at the pouches) proves that we are dealing with a hybrid. Tell Jerry about Mendel's laws (and say hello to Yoko, Jason and the rest of the Orchids Limited crew for me.)
> 
> ...



I did miss that very interesting thread...
Robert do you have more photo of the seedlings flowers?


----------



## Drorchid (Nov 4, 2008)

Here you go (I accidentally deleted some of my pictures from my original posting):
















This is my latest hypothesis regarding Phrag. brasiliense, I think, if Phrag. brasiliense is a natural hybrid and not a man made hybrid it could be the hybrid between these 2 species: sargentianum (or lindleyanum) and christiansenianum; both occur in the same area of Brazil (Picture of Phrag. christiansenianum from Carsten aka Labskous). If you look at Phrag. brasiliense it shares morphological traits of both parents.






Robert


----------



## Phrag-Plus (Nov 5, 2008)

Drorchid said:


> Here you go (I accidentally deleted some of my pictures from my original posting) Robert



Many thanks for the photos Robert,
After finding that taxonomic part on the forum, I did spent many hours on those threads yesterday evening, hours of fun... Very interesting! 
I will need to have a good look at those photos and think about that.... I’ll be back soon!


----------



## NYEric (Nov 5, 2008)

Very interesting. 
When I first saw the OL listing of Phrag Mardi Gras I was interested because I had never heard of brasiliense. I thought the roundness and darkness of the pouch was distinctive and the dark twisting petals also. The consistent white area is also a distinct feature. I can see the influence of the christiansenianum on the staminode but w/out researching the ranges could not guess if the brasiliense is a hybrid. I recommend you cross it w/ phrag Jason Fischer!  Yay besseae hybrids!


----------



## Phrag-Plus (Nov 9, 2008)

Robert[/QUOTE]

Hi Robert,
I will not bring too much in this thread, everything is already said!
The 2 seedlings are showing me than the mother plant is not a specie for sure, neither a primary hybrid for me. I believe and agreeing than lindleyanum (sargenteanum) is involved in this cross with two or more other species. It seems to have some boissierianum (richterii) influence on the first seedling... But very difficult to say...

If I’m looking at the picture of the mother plants posted in this thread and the picture use for the description of the “specie” in the Orchid Digest vol.67 (4). I’m having the impression than the seedlings identified as “Phragbrasiliensesseedling2flower” was the one use for the description? Did you identify “Phragbrasiliensesseedling2flower” as brasiliense???

You are proposing “christiansenianum” as possible parentage, why proposing a “species” of unknown origin? Is it because the conviction of a wild collected specimen?

(Other subject; I was please to see the photo ‘brasRH”; I was always wondering from witch phenotype of sargenteanum Sorcerer’s Apprentice “Lothar AM/AOS” was come from. I may have a clue now...?)


----------



## biothanasis (Nov 9, 2008)

I love it what ever it is, cause we cannot give "beauty" a name...


----------

