Since those judges were so picky about names they should have noticed that there is a besseae forma aureum which is (another) valid name for the flower they had in front of them.
Great flower, congrats!
Great flower, congrats!
Phrag besseae var. flavum no longer...
- Thread starter Orchid-fever
- Start date
Help Support Slippertalk Orchid Forum:
I dont think the judges had anything to do with the name change. Taxonomists did and these guys, like every other reseachers in every fields of science, have to publish or perish. :wink:
So wouldn't the correct name for a yellow besseae be: Phrag. besseae var besseae fma flavum?
Most taxonomist are jackasses. I hope no one takes that personally. 
:evil:
:evil:
Sounds like the "clumpers" are firmly in command at Kew. There was a rumor floating around a while ago, that Kew's reluctance to recognize d'alessandroi as a separate species had to do with it's use (as "besseae") to make many of the F1 besseae hybrids registered in the early days by the RHS.
G
goldenrose
Guest
It makes sense & I can understand what gnathaniel pointed out but they're making it difficult & confusing aren't they? Why can't besseae be the original red, then var. dalessandroi, var. flavum, etc.
When it comes to judging now a new can of worms is opened ....
red, yellow, dalessandroi are all judged against one another. How can dalessandroi & flavum bessies compete against today's current reds? One would think they'd have to, or need to have classes broken into color or variety, as there is for paphs, phals, etc.
Are there any AM bess flavums?
That's what I would think. Is there & I missed it, a flavum dalessandroi? Then it would be bess var. dalessandroi fma flavum? Just seems easier than continuing to repeat besseae at every opportunity.
When it comes to judging now a new can of worms is opened ....
red, yellow, dalessandroi are all judged against one another. How can dalessandroi & flavum bessies compete against today's current reds? One would think they'd have to, or need to have classes broken into color or variety, as there is for paphs, phals, etc.
Are there any AM bess flavums?
gnathaniel
Lurker
The only names currently accepted by Kew are Phrag. besseae, besseae v. besseae, and besseae v. dalessandroi, color forms are listed but not accepted as valid. My (completely uneducated) guess is that the published flavum name is considered a cultivar that doesn't reflect wild populations enough to merit taxonomic status. Or maybe they're just getting tired of endless orchid color form descriptions that you can't tell apart on an herbarium sheet anyway?
Most taxonomist are jackasses. I hope no one takes that personally.
Yeah, but everyone who makes sweeping generalizations about a class of people is a *******! Wait a minute... :wink: Anyway, my dad is a plant taxonomist and most of the time he's much less of a ******* than most people, myself included.
Isn't color one aspect of award scoring? So a flower with smaller NS but better color should still be competitive, right? AOS can do pretty much what it wants WRT its judging system, and I agree that it could/should judge this species the way growers want it judged, including segregation by cultivar if so desired. Judging is primarily useful to the horticulture/hobby spheres, so it seems reasonable that judging should promote the goals of those growers.
We could have fun with this, but we won't do it!......(maybe)
the colour is soooo nice.............wish I could have that in a paph.
You can! armeniacum fma. markii
SlipperKing
Madd Virologist
Sweet flower, sweet award! congrats on your yellow form.
Well played Sir!
D
Drorchid
Guest
That is what I would call it!
Congrats on the award btw! Do you know the parentage of your besseae var besseae f. flavum, and where it came from?
Robert
Rick
Well-Known Member
And I was there to see it in real life.:drool:
Orchid-fever
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2006
- Messages
- 151
- Reaction score
- 0
Thanks everyone. I have to say that the judges were just doing what they are supposed to by checking the valid name on a species. It is those clever taxonomists that keep us on our toes... For better or worse.
As for where the plant came from; it was purchased by a friend. I believe it was from Hilo orchid farm but I will have to ask to be sure. I got 3 besseae flavum plants and 2 of them are really excellent. I named the other clone 'golden goose'. I will look for a picture.
As for where the plant came from; it was purchased by a friend. I believe it was from Hilo orchid farm but I will have to ask to be sure. I got 3 besseae flavum plants and 2 of them are really excellent. I named the other clone 'golden goose'. I will look for a picture.
L
limuhead
Guest
Most taxonomist are jackasses. I hope no one takes that personally.
I think maybe a ******* would take that personally...
The Orchid Boy
Well-Known Member
Congrats on the award!
SlipperFan
Addicted
I really don't understand why a species would be called it's name twice. I.e., how can a form of a species be the same as the species?! Just doesn't compute.
E
Eric Muehlbauer
Guest
When there are variations, one of them, usually the most typical form, gets the species name repeated. This is usually done with subspecies rather than varieties. So, for example, we are **** sapiens sapiens. But chimpanzees have several subspecies. They have several names, but the most typical form is Pan troglodytes troglodytes. In the case of besseae, if a taxonmoist views d'allesandroi as a subspecies rather than a species, then typical besseae would be P. besseae besseae, while the other form would be P. besseae d'allesandroi. The color shouldn't be an issue on that level, but I would think for shows it would be P. besseae besseae fma flavum (or var. flavum, if that's accepted.)
Similar threads
