Paph.maudiae x wardii

[tenman]

I really like this one but was surprised it has no color in it.

 

[Roy]

Its a nice flower but I would have to question the label though. No sign of wardii in it and wardii contributes certain features in everything.

 

[Leo Schordje]

I'm with Roy on wondering about whether the tag is correct. Even if the wardii parent was an album, you would have green warts or bumps on the petals. Smooth petals points toward a possible wrong tag.

 

[biothanasis]

Very nice shape!!!

 

[SlipperKing]

I would have to go along with Roy and Leo as well. Recently a smooth petalled wardii has been described but I don't believe an album form of the smooth petalled one is included in the description.

 

[Bolero]

Well whatever it is, it's a good quality flower with great colouring.

 

[SlipperFan]

Great shape, whatever it is. Probably a hybrid, with that shape.

 

[toddybear]

Excellent green!

 

[GuRu]

...Even if the wardii parent was an album, you would have green warts or bumps on the petals. Smooth petals points toward a possible wrong tag.

Why should it, I'm not so sure about this. P. Maudiae inherited the warts/bumps on the petals from P. callosum, one of its parents. Why should they also be dominant in this continuing cross??
P. wardii f. album is also P. wardii and the nomenclatures don't allow to name the var. or f. in crosses. For example see also P. Maudiae, the nomenclatures say
P. Maudiae = P. callosum x P. lawrenceanum
But the original cross was made with the albino forms of both species and therefore the cross of a 'green' Maudiae is exactly (but not in the sense of the nomenclature ruless)
P. Maudiae = P. callosum v. sanderae x P. lawrenceanum var. hyeanum

Best regards from Germany, rudolf

 

[slippertalker]

I think the followup to Rudolf's comments would be, what parents would lead to such an absence of warts, etc on the petals?

Many Maudiae type crosses have lots of variation in such traits. When you consider that the primary albinistic species that would be involved in this cross have warts, bumps, etc you can easily find that this is simply a matter of hybrid variation.

I don't know if the tag is correct, but it certainly could be.

 

[Roy]

I think the followup to Rudolf's comments would be, what parents would lead to such an absence of warts, etc on the petals?
Many Maudiae type crosses have lots of variation in such traits. When you consider that the primary albinistic species that would be involved in this cross have warts, bumps, etc you can easily find that this is simply a matter of hybrid variation.
I don't know if the tag is correct, but it certainly could be.

The above sounds correct except for the fact that Paphs wardii, sukhakulii, fairrieanum, henryanum etc extend much of their flower shape or color or dorsal shape and markings, characteristics such as the petal warts/spotting or a combination of all into their progeny. These are dominant features which all and sundary can see in the flowers highlights the fact that one of them is a parent. For one seedling to appear without any charateristics of one of those as a parent, IMO, would be more than a miracle.

 

[slippertalker]

Roy, I agree but since all of the probable parents have such warting including callosum and lawrenceanum both of which can be seen in this flower, then how do you account for the absence of such?

 

[Roy]

The absence of spotting or warts in this flower doesn't surprise me given the number of examples of such true Green Maudiae types. Many have only one or 2 warts on the edge of the petal and it wouldn't be hard for them to disappear in particular seedlings. Seeing the parents would help but thats not always possible. Given the many forms of lawrenceanum v Hyeanum, some have a number of warts, some have near nil. This also applies to callosum. This all stems from the outcrossing etc of these plants. The flower in question has a number of warts on the top edges of the petals in a subdued form but they are there.