Philippinense palawan album

[Phaladdict]

Almost there

 

[Guldal]

Ah, it's always a pleause to see a philippinense fma. aureoviride!

Would it be possible with a photo, where one can see the whole plant more clearly?

By the way: is this one of Popows (well, I mean bought from Popow)?

Most kind regards,
Jens

 

[Marco]

I love these. Still one of my faves..wish I had space for one

 

[DrLeslieEe]

I wonder if these are the alboviride forms that are miniature plants?

 

[Phaladdict]

I wonder if these are the alboviride forms that are miniature plants?

Yes is a miniature/compact plant, will uodate post with plant and all flower open

 

[GuRu]

Looks very nice to me and I like it. Congrats to flower this beauty.

 

[Ozpaph]

interesting.

 

[ORG]

This colorform was described officially as
Paphiopedilum philippinense var. compactum f. aureoviride O. Gruss
Die Orchidee (Hamburg) 2(3)E: 3; 2016 (ISSN-Internet 2366-0643)

The Variety was described as
Paphiopedilum philippinense var. compactum O.Gruss, Roellke & Roeth
Die Orchidee 59: 318; 2008

The Variety of Palawan could not described as var. palawanense because another hybrid of Paphiopedilum get the Name Cypripedium Palawanense 1901, the Name was used for the cross betwenn dayanum and rothschildianum. The name is now a synonym of Paph. Kimballianum

 

[NYEric]

Thanks for sharing. There was a miniature album Phil that Marilyn LeDoux had and Mainstreet had that bloomed on a 6" influorense. I am looking for clones of that.

 

[GuRu]

Olaf, what about KEW's Plant List? KEW says Paphiopedilum philippinense var. compactum O.Gruss, Roellke & Roeth is synonym to Paphiopedilum philippinense. See here Paphiopedilum+philippinense . According to KEW's Plant List only the variety Paphiopedilum philippinense var. roebelenii (A.H.Kent) P.J.Cribb is an accepted name. See here Paph philippinenese var. roebelenii

 

[BrucherT]

This colorform was described officially as
Paphiopedilum philippinense var. compactum f. aureoviride O. Gruss
Die Orchidee (Hamburg) 2(3)E: 3; 2016 (ISSN-Internet 2366-0643)

The Variety was described as
Paphiopedilum philippinense var. compactum O.Gruss, Roellke & Roeth
Die Orchidee 59: 318; 2008

The Variety of Palawan could not described as var. palawanense because another hybrid of Paphiopedilum get the Name Cypripedium Palawanense 1901, the Name was used for the cross betwenn dayanum and rothschildianum. The name is now a synonym of Paph. Kimballianum




View attachment 20585 View attachment 20585 View attachment 20586

So beautiful and small plant!

 

[Kate Boyce-Miles]

Really pretty! I have got a near-flowering size one of these.

 

[DrLeslieEe]

Olaf, what about KEW's Plant List? KEW says Paphiopedilum philippinense var. compactum O.Gruss, Roellke & Roeth is synonym to Paphiopedilum philippinense. See here Paphiopedilum+philippinense . According to KEW's Plant List only the variety Paphiopedilum philippinense var. roebelenii (A.H.Kent) P.J.Cribb is an accepted name. See here Paph philippinenese var. roebelenii

The issue with WCSP is that Kew decides what is officially acceptable through their version of standards. This version is followed by scientists and botanists as the bible.


However, this doesn’t mean that officially published described species, forms and varieties that are not accepted by Kew are invalid. It merely means that at that moment in time, it will be relegated as a synonym until further notice. It may take more than 3 years to make any changes to the accepted version if more irrefutable evidence of the contrary is provided.

 

[GuRu]

The issue with WCSP is that Kew decides what is officially acceptable through their version of standards. This version is followed by scientists and botanists as the bible.
However, this doesn’t mean that officially published described species, forms and varieties that are not accepted by Kew are invalid. It merely means that at that moment in time, it will be relegated as a synonym until further notice. It may take more than 3 years to make any changes to the accepted version if more irrefutable evidence of the contrary is provided.

Thanks Leslie, but this means, looking at KEW's Plant List may be helpful but it isn't really the last/ultimate resort. And how can a orchid grower like me, who isn't a professional with botanical issues and names find out which name is really valid and which one is invalid?

 

[Tony]

Ultimately there is no such thing as valid or invalid, nature is messy and organisms exist on a spectrum of traits in which we try to draw lines and distinguish them for our own convenience. Taxonomy is a never ending battle between splitters and lumpers, I tend to side with the splitters because I don't see any scenario in which maintaining more detailed records of our plants is a bad thing. When taxa get lumped together and people change their tags it inevitably becomes a giant mess later when things get split up again. Look at all the Wössner Black Wings masquerading as Johanna Burkhardts for an example. Adductum and anitum are clearly different plants to anyone with a pair of functioning eyeballs but their hybrids are a mess now thanks to the lumpers.

 

[blondie]

Very nice

 

[Rockbend]

I've grown both varieties for 20+ years: the 'normal' one has 15"- 18" leaves and averages 6 flowers per spike, and the 'compact' one has 6" - 8" leaves and averages 3 flowers per spike.