......Rudolf, did you notice the 3 spots on the pouch? I thought it would riled your up re: the right name lol.
Leslie, of course I saw the spots on the pouch and.......some weeks ago I would have pointed out on them......
To be honest, the possibility a Paph. leucochilum could have spots on the pouch doesn't still convince me. Before I wrote my post here yesterday I had a close look regarding Paph. leucochilum in Olaf's new book. I find, even there isn't visible a clear line and after reading all about Paph. leucochilum I was as clever as before.
-Olaf's talking of Paph. godefroyae f. leuchochilum not of Paph. leucochilum as a true species
-He writes under the point describiton:
"The colour form has got the same shape and colouration as Paph. godefroyae. Except the lip doesn't show any spots or drawings. Often the flowers are bigger than these of Pah. godefroyae.
-He writes under the point Variations:
".........In fact there are also almost reddish-black clones of the forma leucochilum, but they don't conform in no way the describtion of the form. There is not only written that the shoe/pouch doesn't have any spots/dots but also that the shoe/pouch is clearly white. Therefore these dark clones have to be classified as Paph. godefroyae f. godefroyae."
He writes under the point possibilities of confusion:
"It distinguishes by the normal form of Paph. godefroyae by its clear white shoe/pouch."
Olaf shows a lot of photos of Paph. g. f. leucochilum. The majority do have a spotless white pouch but unfortunately he shows also few photos with few spots on the lip/pouch.
And he wites furthermore :
According to CRIBB and FUCHS (personal communication) there exist at the location plants with a clear white pouch as well as plants with dots/spots on its lips.
What next?
