Phrag tetzlaffianum

[NYEric]

Not definitively. I've heard numerous stories about the plant and we may never be sure without DNA analysis.

 

[Wendy]

It was John M, who posts on here, that had Phrag Simon Marcotte awarded...John had nothing to do with Phrag tetzlaffianum. I believe his plant was awarded before tetzlaffianum came 'to be'. (but I could be wrong)

 

[ORG]

I think the story is very easy.
Both Mr. Marcotte and Tetzlaff get the plants from the same person or from the same import from Venezuela. The plants were labeled as Phrag. klotzscheanum, perhaps because they have lanceolate leaves (but bigger then these of klotscheanum).
When the plant came in flower then it was clear for both, that it is not Phrag. klotscheanum.

Then you can try to make an analyze if it is perhaps a hybrid or a species.

Mr. Marcotte came to the reult that it is a new hybrid, perhaps Nitidissimum with ecuadorense (in truth pearcei) and so he named the hybrid after his dog Simon.

When you try to analyze the parents then you must come to the result that
there are no other species which could produce flowers and especially a staminode like these of tetzlaffianum. Before the Phrag. tezlaffianum was described a very long discussion and analyze was made with the decision in the end to make a description of a new species.

Best greetings

Olaf

 

[SlipperFan]

Thanks, Olaf. It pays to know history.

 

[cnycharles]

thank you for the explanation.

 

[Wendy]

I'm pretty sure that John got his plant (Phrag Simon Marcotte 'Sheila' AM/AOS) from a society sales table and that it already had the cross on the label. Hopefully he sees this post and can clarify how he got his plant.

 

[John M]

Olaf, I'm afraid that your assumptions about my involvement here are completely incorrect. This is how nasty rumours get started and people's reputations get damaged. You should be more careful, please. I did NOT ever receive any plants from Venezuela. I have never owned any plants labelled as klotzscheanum. .....and I did NOT guess that the name for my plant should be Nitidissimum x ecuadorense.

I bought my plant, already labelled as Phrag. (Nitidissimum x ecuadorense) from a society sales table at a show in the late 80's. It grew and finally bloomed and was awarded an AM/AOS in 1993. The cross was not registered; so, I had to do that. Since I had bought the plant from a society sales table years before, it was impossible for me to determine who was the seller. Not being able to track down the originator of the cross, I explained my situation to the RHS and respectfully requested that I be allowed to name the cross. The RHS agreed and the cross was registered as Phrag. Simon Marcotte O/U (originator unknown). Yes, Simon was my dog....a very special member of my family.

Then, a few years later, Alan Tetzlaff and I did a trade. He gave me a large number of ecuadorense seedlings and I gave him a division of my awarded Phrag. Simon Marcotte 'Sheila' AM/AOS. In late 1998, I became seriously ill and dropped out of the orchid world until 2002. Shortly after dropping out of orchids, I heard (via a friend, who was still in orchids), that a rumour about me was circulating. People were saying that I had died! Therefore of course, people thought that I was permanently gone from the orchid world. When I returned to the orchid world (shockingly, rising from the dead, according to some), I soon found out that there was a new species called tetzlaffianum, described by you, which was "discovered" growing in the collection of Alan Tetzlaff.....and which is identical in every way to my Phrag. Simon Marcotte 'Sheila' AM/AOS. Those are the facts. Exactly where and how Alan got his tetzlaffianum is really for Alan to explain.

Whether or not my plant was labelled correctly, I conceed, is up for discussion. After all, from where does it get the tightly twisted petals? Neither Nitidissimum nor ecuadorense have petals like that. However, that is the name it had when I got it and at the time of being awarded, the flower seemed to be correct as far as I and the judges would expect from that cross. You say differently now; but, you are far more expert about such things than me, or the judges. Perhaps you are correct in that Phrag. Simon Marcotte 'Sheila' is not (Nitidissimum x ecuadorense); but, until I see a batch of selfing seedlings from Alan's tetzlaffianum grown up and blooming and remaining stable and true to the parent plant's attributes, I am still "on the fence" as to the identity of tetzlaffianum. I have acquired a piece of tetzlaffianum from Wendy, who got it by successfully bidding on a division which was donated by Alan to a fund raising auction. Last year I sent selfing seeds to a lab for germination; but, unfortunately, the lab does not yet see any germination. I have asked them to move the seeds to a new mother flask with a new formulation to try and stimulate some action. Time will tell.....hopefully.

 

[Wendy]

Thanks John. I was pretty sure I was right but didn't want to write it down and be way off base.

 

[SlipperFan]

Like I said, it pays to know history.

 

[NYEric]

Not definitively. I've heard numerous stories about the plant and we may never be sure without DNA analysis.

 

[Phrag-Plus]

I think the story is very easy.
Both Mr. Marcotte and Tetzlaff get the plants from the same person or from the same import from Venezuela. The plants were labeled as Phrag. klotzscheanum, perhaps because they have lanceolate leaves (but bigger then these of klotscheanum).
When the plant came in flower then it was clear for both, that it is not Phrag. klotscheanum.

Then you can try to make an analyze if it is perhaps a hybrid or a species.

Mr. Marcotte came to the reult that it is a new hybrid, perhaps Nitidissimum with ecuadorense and so he named the hybrid after his dog Simon.

When you try to analyze the parents then you must come to the result that
there are no other species which could produce flowers and especially a staminode like these of tetzlaffianum. Before the Phrag. tezlaffianum was described a very long discussion and analyze was made with the decision in the end to make a description of a new species.

Best greetings

Olaf

Hi Olaf, I was very surprise to read all those affirmations in this story and post:

1) Both Mr. Marcotte and Tetzlaff get the plants from the same person (Allan got his plant from John and I. Did John and I got it from the same source, this is a probability.)

2) or from the same import from Venezuela. ( This is a pure speculation )

3) The plants were labelled as Phrag. klotzscheanum, ( Only the first one I’ve bought at Montreal Canada ( 1990 ) was labelled as klotzscheanum ‘Michael’’ Others from Ottawa, Canada (1991-92) were from a tray of nine unlabelled Phragmipediums.)

4) perhaps because they have lanceolate leaves (but bigger then these of klotscheanum). (This is supposition and interpretation)

5) When the plant came in flower then it was clear for both, that it is not Phrag. klotscheanum. (John is saying than his plant was labelled as Nitidissimum x ecuadorense when he got it. And I did mention that klotzscheanum mislabelling to Allan only years later he never expected that species to flower)

6) Mr. Marcotte came to the result that it is a new hybrid, perhaps Nitidissimum with ecuadorense (in truth pearcei) and so he named the hybrid after his dog Simon. (There is a tale about some parentage search for that plant just before it was registered. But that tale never mentioned if the plant was already labelled under those name or not… Another assumption!)

I did try for over 20 years now to self or sib that plant without any success!
Usually Phragmipedium species are very easy to set seedpods and their seeds are having a very good % of germination. It doesn’t mean they are easy to be grown once out of flask after that stage but they usually thrive in flask.

Unfortunately this one work out like a 3N for me, when breeding it gave very few seedlings. My first hybrid was La Davière (Simon Marcotte x longifolium) and 3 seedlings came out from that cross and very similar to longifolium.