PEoY or sand?

[Leo Schordje]

To my eyes Wendy's plant looks like a sanderianum. The column is right. The elongated dorsal is in the range of some of the variation I have seen. The colors are a little off, but that may in part be an artifact of the photo.

I am no expert, and I don't want to hijack this post. But for comparison, here are some pictures of my sanderianums. The first 'inv 580' bloomed in 2003 and has not rebloomed yet.

The second "inv #479' is a seedling from the batch of seedlings I have been selling. I did not make this cross, but I did end up with a batch of seedlings. It is from a 1998 seed pod. It bloomed in 2007, and it has not rebloomed yet. This one has a more elongated dorsal, more like Wendy's plant.

# 580 bloomed 2003

# 479 bloomed 2007

 

[Wendy]

Very interesting. Thank you Leo. I am going to leave the tag as Paph sanderianum...as it appears that it may be the real thing. At least it won't be used for breeding as I am not into that line of the hobby. And even though it is not a quality flower I will keep it.

 

[SlipperKing]

Wendy, How long have you had this plant? Who did you get the plant from? If it came from the source the MK shouldn't even be brought into the discussion. The only confusion involved was between sanderianum F2 plants and PEOY. On the other hand, if you recieved it after many changes of hands, it could be anything.
Comparing it to the OL plant (long nose) they look like siblings to me.

 

[Wendy]

I got it (June 08) from the collection of the late Gary Schrieber, and he got it as a seedling, so it definitely hasn't changed hands. Gary was also a good responsible grower so there is no reason to suspect the tag.

 

[SlipperKing]

Well there you go then....sandie owner you!

 

[biothanasis]

Very nice!!!!!

 

[Wendy]

Second flower....a bit better than the first.

 

[kentuckiense]

To be entirely honest, I don't think it's pure sanderianum.

My reasoning:

1. The petals don't twist very much. This could change as the flower ages, though.
2. The staminode. It is square, yellow, and appears to have an infusion of green bottom/center. That strongly suggests philippinense influence to me. Compare to Leo's sanderianum. This is the strongest evidence against sanderianum, in my opinion.
3. The color. Doesn't seem to be a hint of red/brown. I've never seen a sanderianum of that color. Granted, I've only ever seen pictures.

However, I'm no taxonomist, and I have my doubts about my interpretation of the characteristics. So that's just my speculation. Regardless of parentage, it's still a well-bloomed and beautiful plant.

 

[Rick]

Wendy.

I think you and Kentuckiensis are seeing the same thing about the staminode as I am.

It's not as "heart" shaped and smooth edge as most of the sanderianum staminodes pictured. It has a bit of "boxiness" and carrunculated edges (and no red center) that makes it look like it has a dash of phili in it.

Kind of odd time of year for a sanderianum to bloom too (but that certainly doesn't make or break the deal).

 

[SlipperKing]

On my monitor I see no hint of green in the stami. If this plant is really from the Root's cross it has been a looooong time maturing to bloom. Lets face it, it's a mule. The simularities of Wendy's plant to Robert's are too numerious to not of come from the same source. Nobody doubted the verity of his plant being sanderianum even with the strange elongated pouch. It's quite possible to get sports bloom out from man made crosses with such a high survival rate flasking achieves. I don't recall ever seeing both parents Root used, only Jacob's Ladder which was normal.

I have to add, I just reread Robert's post and I mis read the parents of his particular plant. Simularites are there but not as strong as I first thought.

 

[Leo Schordje]

I can't say 100% for sure myself from the photos. In favor of the species note that the second of my sanderianums, "479" the petals do not twist anywhere near as much as the first.

On the con side, against species; both sanderianums of mine have ovaries with abosolutely no dark hairs on them. Paph sanderianum & giganteum I believe are the two Paphs with snow white ovaries. But I have not bloomed many hybrids, so I don't know how this trait carries through.

 

[paphioland]

It is some type of hybrid that definitely has sand in it. I am not sure what that hybrid is but I would guess something similar to angelhair. There is really no way to tell for sure what hybrid it is. Although due to how long sands and multis take to bloom I would say angel hair is a very good guess.

 

[Drorchid]

On my monitor I see no hint of green in the stami. If this plant is really from the Root's cross it has been a looooong time maturing to bloom. Lets face it, it's a mule. The simularities of Wendy's plant to Robert's are too numerious to not of come from the same source. Nobody doubted the verity of his plant being sanderianum even with the strange elongated pouch. It's quite possible to get sports bloom out from man made crosses with such a high survival rate flasking achieves. I don't recall ever seeing both parents Root used, only Jacob's Ladder which was normal.

I have to add, I just reread Robert's post and I mis read the parents of his particular plant. Simularites are there but not as strong as I first thought.

The plant I showed was a sib cross between two seedlings of Paph. sanderianum ('Deep Flight' x 'Deep Pockets'), that I believe originated from Terry Root.

When I look at Wendy's plant, It just does NOT look like a pure sanderianum. The petals are wrong (too straight), the staminode does not look right, and the dorsal sepal looks too upright. I too think it is a sanderianum hybrid backcrossed to sanderianum. (so it is either PEOY x sanderianum or MK x sanderianum).

Robert

 

[John M]

I too think it is a sanderianum hybrid backcrossed to sanderianum. (so it is either PEOY x sanderianum or MK x sanderianum).
Robert

I've been discussing this with Wendy over e-mail and my opinion was that it looked more like MK (a poor one), than anything else. Whatever it is, I have been sure from the start that it is not pure sanderianum, for the same reasons that Robert identifies (petals not right, staminode not right, dorsal sepal not right, plus, there are some dark hairs on the ovary. However, I still was unsure about what it could be.

Now, Robert has suggested that it is either PEoY x sanderianum or MK x sanderianum. That makes sense! I vote for MK x sanderianum.

 

[Wendy]

Thanks everyone. I will change the tag to read 'sanderianum hybrid'.

Can't wait for spring now....my real sanderianum will be in bloom and I can show that one off without ID doubts. :clap: