The Mutant
Well-Known Member
That's what I got confused about as well, because mine is an MK, no doubt about it.
Newly acquired Paph. sanderianum
- Thread starter Camellkc
- Start date
Help Support Slippertalk Orchid Forum:
Camellkc
Well-Known Member
Show you the ovary of my sanderianum, pure white in color~~
Re. Muntant, no doubt that yours must be MK as distinguished from the color of pouch - Yellowish.
Re. Muntant, no doubt that yours must be MK as distinguished from the color of pouch - Yellowish.
The Mutant
Well-Known Member
But the ovary on yours looks like the one on Bjorn's i.e. not pure white? It looks like it has the same faint colouring like his does or is that only how it appears on my screen?
Yup, mine is a sandishyellowbrown kind of colour and I don't think the pouches has that particular shape I've come to associate with sanderianum (yours have that shape however).
I'm just getting more and more confused...
Camellkc
Well-Known Member
But the ovary on yours looks like the one on Bjorn's i.e. not pure white? It looks like it has the same faint colouring like his does or is that only how it appears on my screen?
Yup, mine is a sandishyellowbrown kind of colour and I don't think the pouches has that particular shape I've come to associate with sanderianum (yours have that shape however).
I'm just getting more and more confused...
Maybe the color of photo has distortion. It is white in reality.
. I think we should distinguish whether it is a sanderianum from more traits, such as color of petals, pouch etc. other than simply from the ovary's color.I have a MK in spike and the first flower will open in these few days. I can photo it with my sanderianum for comparison.
The Mutant
Well-Known Member
It could be the hairs making it look like it has pinkish stripes. Of what I can discern of the staminoids in the first picture, yours also look like sanderianum (they appear more 'pinched' at the bottom than on MK for example). It seems my MK came and messed up the 'easy' way to confirm if what one have is a pure sandy or not. :rollhappy:Maybe the color of photo has distortion. It is white in reality.
I have a MK in spike and the first flower will open in these few days. I can photo it with my sanderianum for comparison.
To me, yours look like a straight sandy and I'm feeling guilty for casting any doubts on the ID of your Paph. I'll go and spank my MK for being odd.
I have never seen anything like this! Its my plants twin! Could they have the same source? I have a feeling that mine came from Taiwan although it was bought as a seedling in Germany. It grew very well and until it flowered I was convinced that it was a sandie. Afterwards I have been convinced that there was some genetic mix-up perhaps Mk x sandie? Or similar? Well now I do not know what to believe anymore, at least mine is no typical sanderianum, too round shoulders and not pointed enough, my flower is just not narrow enough for a typical sanderianum. What shall I believe?:sob:
The Mutant
Well-Known Member
It seems the more pictures we post in this thread, the more confusing it gets... I also thought it looked like the ovaries on your MK, but the flowers look different.
I will play the devil's advocate and say that it might be a possibility of MK being back crossed to sanderianum. In fact, Bjorn's plants looks like an MK backcross to me. The thing with a back cross is you can see plants that you can tell the obvious difference that its a hybrid but some progenies of the cross will be so close to one of the parent species that it is often hard to distinguish if not impossible. You have to look at subtle differences (like white ovaries for sandies..) as clue. To make it even more harder, some population in nature have these subtle differences and to me the only way to be sure is to know the progenies of the parent plant. Check out the vietnamense (red pigmentation staminode vs pure green) same can be said to godefroyae. Another example is the Cochlopetalum section. Might as well call all of them Pinocchio. (a little exaggeration on my part)
Obviously 90% of the plants in the market have unknown sources. This is the reason why I am so against back crosses. It just adds to the confusion.
Just to be clear. I am not saying Camellkc plant is a hybrid. But it has a possibility of being one. In-Charm is a reputable source but even reputable sources will have this hiccups especially if the parent plant's origin is questionable.
Obviously 90% of the plants in the market have unknown sources. This is the reason why I am so against back crosses. It just adds to the confusion.
Just to be clear. I am not saying Camellkc plant is a hybrid. But it has a possibility of being one. In-Charm is a reputable source but even reputable sources will have this hiccups especially if the parent plant's origin is questionable.
After rechecking the pictures, I have come to the conclusion that mine is MK x S while Camellk's probably is a sanderianum. But this back-crossing business makes it difficult. Quite a few awarded clones of different species has turned out to be hybrids. Eggshell mentiones a few, is there any pure leucochillum out there?, another one is that gigantic esquirolei Taka that might just as well be Hans Strahl ( Bidborough x esquiroleii) the last one was rewarded at the world congress in Dijon. JeanLux knows that story well.:evil::arrr::fight:
Last edited:
The Mutant
Well-Known Member
Does this mean it's possible than my MK is an MK x S too? White ovaries and all, sanderianum seems to be rather dominant in it anyway:
C
Cheyenne
Guest
We need more pictures from straight on showing the dorsal with the stripes and petal marking. I am really leaning to this not being a pure sanderianum. The petals look to wide, dorsal looks to wide, petals stay pretty wide after leaving the pouch and not very long petals. I would measure the dorsal also. In the best sanderianum breeding out there the dorsal width is around 2.5-2.9cm. More commonly it is 2-2.5cm. That is for the best breeding. Common clones are usually 1.5-2cm.
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2009
- Messages
- 4,032
- Reaction score
- 4,879
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2009
- Messages
- 4,032
- Reaction score
- 4,879
Just share the blooms. Compared with those owned by expertise, this is definitely not a good one but I only wish to touch this species.
I hope adult plant is easier for it to thrive afterward.
I think it is not clear sandy. Typical sandy has two "shoulders", too, formed by laterals.
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2009
- Messages
- 4,032
- Reaction score
- 4,879
Sandy like a body bilder with two melons under its armpits.
The Mutant
Well-Known Member
:rollhappy:
Love the description.
Yay! I would've called it that either way, but it's always nice to have correctly labeled plants. Mine is a shy MK.
there are no fake Parvis going around, are there? :evil:
Just fake besseae Eric ;-)
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2
Camellkc
Well-Known Member
Thank you for your comment. I immediately screen through some photos posted in Google, and also those posted by Mr. Shen and note that shoulder is not a must for sanderianum. I think something changes after several breeding programmes and the petal width seems also varies. Some as wide as mine while some as narrow as 1 cm.
I have measured the DS and it is 2.1 cm.
