Paphiopedilum wolterianum album (syn. appletonianum album)

[DrLeslieEe]

That is a peoblem, like in many other cases.
The downward bent apical half of the petals and their narrow shape of immaculatum seems to be quite obvious.
Concerning the staminode besides a difference in colour it seems that the sharp dents are missing, or at least they are strongly bent backwards. Can you confirme that?

Yes Musa. Good observation for these pics.
The staminode of the wolterianum/appletonianum is like 2 lungs side by side, with an indentation at the basal edge, creating an inverted V shape. The immaculatum pic lacks this indent and is pointed at the bottom.

However, as I wanted to confirm the the staminodes of these album varieties in the literature, I summoned my Oaf Gruss's album book and Orchid Digest album annotations, as well as Braem's books and Koopowitz's recent annotations in Orchid Digest (Dec 2018), some interesting observations were made:

1. appletonianum albums have the indented staminode at bottom (some with a small tongue like tip, making an inverted W)
2. cerveranum fm. viride has the rounded tip staminode (like the immaculatum)

So this makes the whole thing messy.

Because this means that the appletonianum from Tokyo nursery is a cerveranum, which according to WCSP is a synonym for appletonianum!!!!!.

Then I looked at the staminode of my amabile album (syn. bullenianum) and it looks nothing like the published staminodes in the books/articles of bullenianum, but similar to the rounded staminode of the cerveranum aka appletonianum!!!

Based on staminodes, the bottom line is this....

What we thought as amabile/bullenianum is actually appletonianum album/viride/immaculata.

What we thought was wolterianum is also appletonianum album/viride/immaculata.

What we thought was appletonianum (Tokyo nursery pic) was a cerveranum fm. viride, which is a synonym for appletonianum album/viride/immaculata.

So, after all this, Musa and Hakone, they are ALL appletonianums! LOL

 

[musa]

A very sound conclusion of the characteristics of staminods, thanks for summarizing it, Leslie!

One basic question puzzles me still: How should be rated the characteristics of staminodes, petalforms, ovaries bracts, habit, etc...? And what does it mean for taxonomy.
I'm aware that a straight answer won't be possible but how is to deal with it.
The problem also emerges in treating misslabled plants, especially when hybrids come in.

 

[Ozpaph]

i like the flower

 

[DrLeslieEe]

A very sound conclusion of the characteristics of staminods, thanks for summarizing it, Leslie!

One basic question puzzles me still: How should be rated the characteristics of staminodes, petalforms, ovaries bracts, habit, etc...? And what does it mean for taxonomy.
I'm aware that a straight answer won't be possible but how is to deal with it.
The problem also emerges in treating misslabled plants, especially when hybrids come in.

Taxonomy in the old days were based on similarity of flower parts, flower colour, plant parts and growth habits. Similar ones were grouped together and given species names in published print material. These days, DNA markers are used to compare similar ancestry as well.

Because of DNA, there has been some radical revelations of groups of plants being related even when the flower and plants are drastically different. When moved together and renamed, it created some controversy and many unhappy people.

For example, they moved Neofinetia into Vanda! That was a travesty to the Japanese growers.

Another example is moving Laelia (mini ones) into Cattleyas. Not many Cattleya experts liked that.

But that is currently the accepted method of classification, a combination of old world taxonomy with the DNA sequencing to confirm.

 

[Guldal]

Your appletonianum is a very beautifull example, Leslie - and looks so well grown. Kudos for culture!

Hilmar (Bauch of Assendorfer Orchideensucht) has seemingly sold innumerable plantlets of this cross under the epithet 'album'.
I wholeheartedly agree with you, that that's misleading - as both yours and musa's photos show. This is further made evidently clear when compared with the photo of Hakone's flower! As stated before, it is with true albinism as it is with pregnancy - you are either pregnant or not! (A consideration most appropriate with the botanical designation for the albino-form of the species being 'immaculatum'...semi-imm...no, that's simply not viable! ).
The appropriate name for the colour form of yours and musa's plants might probably be more in the direction of: appletonianum fma. albovirescens (Hort.).

Leslie, I loved you expound on the theme of appletonianum/amabile/cerveranum/bullenianum/etc.
Braem states in the 2nd edition of his book on the genus, that: "Paphiopedilum appletonianum and P. bullenianum are two of the most problematic taxa in Paphiopedilum taxanomy" (Braem et al., 2016, p. 279f.) - so no wonder, if some of us lesser spirits get confused...albeit, now on a higher level! And, after all, botanists have to be kept occupied, haven't they!

Kind regards, Jens

 

[Hakone]

I agree with you ich , appletonianum fma. albovirescens. Here is true appletonianum immaculatum
Photograph : Vu Dinh An , owner : Luat Nguyen Huu.

 

[Guldal]

Splendiferous examples, Hakone...as immaculate as the Holy Virgin herself...and possibly ready to join her in her assumption into Heaven!

 

[Markhamite]

I'm in love with this plant.

 

[DrLeslieEe]

Your appletonianum is a very beautifull example, Leslie - and looks so well grown. Kudos for culture!

Hilmar (Bauch of Assendorfer Orchideensucht) has seemingly sold innumerable plantlets of this cross under the epithet 'album'.
I wholeheartedly agree with you, that that's misleading - as both yours and musa's photos show. This is further made evidently clear when compared with the photo of Hakone's flower! As stated before, it is with true albinism as it is with pregnancy - you are either pregnant or not! (A consideration most appropriate with the botanical designation for the albino-form of the species being 'immaculatum'...semi-imm...no, that's simply not viable! ).
The appropriate name for the colour form of yours and musa's plants might probably be more in the direction of: appletonianum fma. albovirescens (Hort.).

Leslie, I loved you expound on the theme of appletonianum/amabile/cerveranum/bullenianum/etc.
Braem states in the 2nd edition of his book on the genus, that: "Paphiopedilum appletonianum and P. bullenianum are two of the most problematic taxa in Paphiopedilum taxanomy" (Braem et al., 2016, p. 279f.) - so no wonder, if some of us lesser spirits get confused...albeit, now on a higher level! And, after all, botanists have to be kept occupied, haven't they!

Kind regards, Jens

Thanks for your kind words.

In regards to designation, albo-virescens still mean a white and green flower without any browns/reds. That's why proposed 'almost' or quasi-alboviride.

Here in lies the issue with labelling of sales inventory:

If a flower appeared phenotypically album but produced quasi album offsprings, is it wrong to label as album parent if offsprings were not flowered yet?

What if some offsprings were pure albums and others quasi? Will that disqualify all albums from this selfing as pure albums because their sibs were not pure albums? I have seen cases like this with hirsutissimum alboviride where some offsrpings had brown spots on petal bases and others didn't.

The other issue is that the flower is mostly green/white even with brown dots here and there. It will always when selfed produced similar flowers or more pure albums. It will not result to the type coloration with reds and browns. In other words it is a stable color. The question is, will labelling it an album be an issue since these browns may disappear in some offsprings? I suspect these brown spots as merely part of the same genetic pathway as the hairy pubescent and not a color gene.

I myself have no issue with naming an albo-virescens, even with sporadic minute brown spots on flower (contrary to taxonomists).

 

[musa]

If my vocabulary serves me well, virescence means becomming greenish what implies not being totaly green. That would be viridis. So the expression is at least comprehensible, even though not being conforme with taxonomists.

 

[Guldal]

Here in lies the issue with labelling of sales inventory:

If a flower appeared phenotypically album but produced quasi album offsprings, is it wrong to label as album parent if offsprings were not flowered yet?

What if some offsprings were pure albums and others quasi? Will that disqualify all albums from this selfing as pure albums because their sibs were not pure albums? I have seen cases like this with hirsutissimum alboviride where some offsrpings had brown spots on petal bases and others didn't.

In this case, though, I don't think we need to bother ourselves addressing this issue. In Hilmar's
webshop there is a picture of, what I assume is, the flower of the motherplant - with exactly the same minute dark spots:
https://www.asendorfer-orchideen.co...lterianum-var-album-x-self&controller=product

But, Leslie, compared with the photo of your clone, your flower is definately the better one!

 

[DrLeslieEe]

Thanks Jens for the link and parent pic.
It does indeed have the brown spots on the basal petal portion. That's where the offsprings got it from.
Goes to show that even with a selfing, the form can improve over the parent. Kudos to Hilmar for doing this!

 

[Ozpaph]

I think 'albinism' is a phenotypic trait and not a genetic trait ie - it either looks album or it doesnt. How it breed might be important but doesnt define the parent unless observers disagree about the albinism.

 

[DrLeslieEe]

Here is the second wolterianum to bloom from my Redland batch. Plant now belongs to Zephyrus Orchids (check them out on instagram). Note the good shape and the minute brown marks at petal base as well. Staminode is similar to mine.


Pic property of Zephyrus Orchids*