Phragmipedium besseae var dalessandroi

[Heather]

Here’s an update with the new, and last bloom. Better than the mangled one, for sure. I’m happy with it, though I believe it had some traits of both besseae and dalessandroi.

 

[terryros]

Here’s an update with the new, and last bloom. Better than the mangled one, for sure. I’m happy with it, though I believe it had some traits of both besseae and dalessandroi.

The experts who champion making this besseae var. dalessandroi have some strong arguments.

 

[alex.sorensen51]

Rauhaarigger did say it, correctly though, although inferred according to the language usage.But,never mind..we got it. That varietal has a very dominant input on some crosses,for instance Wanakee Sunset,which reduces in size of flower,and instigates creeping growth of the runners.

I agree with you,very much differrent than QF maria,having that creeping growth,and smaller flowers, which leads to my belief that it is atotally separate varietal.

 

[NYEric]

We, are working (slowly) to translate the book from German to English. Hopefully mid 2024.

What is your book called? Sounds neat. Is there an English version (if published in German)?

 

[Morja]

We, are working (slowly) to translate the book from German to English. Hopefully mid 2024.

Thanks Eric!!!

 

[FrankRC]

Kew says otherwise.

https://powo.science.kew.org/taxon/urn:lsid:ipni.org:names:303734-2

Kew doesn't say that anything is, or is not, a species. Kew aggregates articles that are published and that it receives into a database. The Kew database does no field research, no peer review, and in most cases the people who maintain the database never even see the plants/species in question. So asserting that "Kew" says something is or is not a good species is fundamentally flawed on its face.

 

[FrankRC]

dalessandroi has a creeping growth habit as well,while bessae has a clumping one, again making for a much different species

The reason we are all saying that besseae and v. d'alessandroi are so many different things is because all plants of besseae and its variety exhibit mixed taxonomic attributes in all populations, everywhere. Some plants have longer rhizomes, and I suspect that this is a factor of how wet the immediate environment is around the plant and how vertical the surface on which the plant is growing is. There are red clones at the type location of v. d'alessandroi, so we can't use color. V. d'alessandroi was formally described as having a more compact growing habit. Well, that's not reflective of natural realities where the plants are very large. I have a photo of myself at the type location holding a plant and the leaves are as big as my forearm. Can't say its downswept petals, plants with downswept petals can be found everywhere. Can't say its the white star at the middle of the flower, you can find those everywhere. Staminodes vary everywhere you look and staminodes are useless in this genus as they are not stable. Some plants of besseae elsewhere have a branding flower spike so that is not determinative either. However, as published, there a slight difference in how frequent the spikes at the type location of v. d'alessandroi branch and how many flowers are open at a time. That makes d'alessandroi a variety, and not a distinct species. So the question is, what, exactly, and specifically, makes v. d'alessandroi different? What significant attribute makes it a species? You would have to identify something, anything, that is unique to v. d'alessandroi and can't be found on any other plant of besseae, anywhere else in Ecuador or Peru? If you can't identify something, then you don't have a species, especially in this genus where every species is inherently variable across multiple taxonomic factors, phenotypic plasticity has been misinterpreted as stable morphology, and plant biology has been misunderstood and misinterpreted on a such a scale that we have more synonyms than we do good species.

So, challenge:

Tell me what makes v. d'alessamndrci a species? Not a variety or a form, but a species unique in the genus and the plant kingdom? Some attribute that can only be found in this species and this species only?

 

[FrankRC]

Phragmipedium dalessandroi is a species but was mixed so often in culture that you can trust not often what you have seen.
I had the possibility to see the species in nature and have seen the first plants in Europe in the collection of Jersey. Around 10 years ago Ken Lucyk tried to explain very detailed in an article in the German Journal 'Die Orchidee' the differences between. He had the experiences and knowledge with both species when he worked a longer time in Ecuador. Parts of this examination you find also in my Phragmipedidum-book.
The problem was later also thyt the first hybrids in Jersey with dalessandroi and not besseae.
Here a picture of a typical well cultivated plant

Olaf I was at Ecuagenera when Kyle was there and he did this analysis. He worked exclusively with a few plants that were in the Ecuagenera greenhouse. The plants were recently collected, dry, some were dying, and showed signs of stress. As you all know I am not a fan of practicing any natural science in unnatural conditions.

Best,

Frank

 

[terryros]

Olaf I was at Ecuagenera when Kyle was there and he did this analysis. He worked exclusively with a few plants that were in the Ecuagenera greenhouse. The plants were recently collected, dry, some were dying, and showed signs of stress. As you all know I am not a fan of practicing any natural science in unnatural conditions.

Best,

Frank

Frank, has any detailed genome activity been done on any of our problematic Phrag species? You could even just take plant most would call a besseae (or schlimii) and then one that a group of people call dalessandroi (or fischeri) and do full genome analysis. I don’t think there is a dividing line of how many base pairs difference make a new species, but certainly finding the same number of chromosomes with mostly minor differences would support the single species opinion.

 

[FrankRC]

Frank, has any detailed genome activity been done on any of our problematic Phrag species? You could even just take plant most would call a besseae (or schlimii) and then one that a group of people call dalessandroi (or fischeri) and do full genome analysis. I don’t think there is a dividing line of how many base pairs difference make a new species, but certainly finding the same number of chromosomes with mostly minor differences would support the single species opinion.

Unfortunately, no. Only testing done on how many base pairs of chromosomes, and that number varies throughout. Besseae and schlimii both have variable amounts of chromosomes. While we don't have such a study in this genus, we do for other genera of flowering plants (please, lets not forget that our beloved slippers are part of a much, much larger world of flowering plants and should not be examined in isolation) and one of the more recent studies found genetic variation in ~25% of species. Given that what we do know demonstrates variability in genetics from plant to plant, and including what we know about the adaptability and biology of Phrags overall, it would not surprise me if we found a range a variation in the genome and put a stake at one end and another at the other end and came out with a set of variations that make a species unique.

I know of only one effort to map the genome of a slipper, at the State University of New York, and that effort required 25 pounds of material (it is/was mexipedium). To do Phrags correctly would require several hundred pounds as we would need to sample wild populations of besseae from Peru through Ecuador (never accept the result of any genetic testing done on greenhouse material as gospel about the diversity within wild populations) and permission from both countries to collect that much material and destroy it. Maybe one day somebody can pull out a tricorder like in Star Trek and get an answer. In short, there is nothing in flight that I am aware of and nothing planned.

Best,

 

[KateL]

dalessandroi has a creeping growth habit as well,while bessae has a clumping one, again making for a much different species

Hi Alex,
I hesitate to weigh in here, but I think you have this backwards. I refer you to the Sept. 2020 article in Orchids (the AOS magazine) by Olaf Gruss (who, along with Dodson, published the original article describing Phragmipedium dalessandroi as a separate species, in Orchidee (Hamburg) in 1996).
It is dalessandroi that has the compact plant with clumping growth habit, and is nonstoloniferous - not besseae, which sometimes has that climbing growth habit.
Frank C. has MUCH more real-world experience than me; he’s a wonderful speaker; I respect his opinion greatly. However, for most of us, there is a practicality in accepting that two species are now recognized by AOS and Kew.
Frank is correct in the sense that there is considerable variability in besseae, as to petal shape, stolon shape, color, etc. Sometimes besseae is stoloniferous, sometimes nonstoloniferous.
The most definitive distinction is one that is currently impractical for me, as a hobbyist, i.e., that the chromosome count for besseae is reported to be 2n=24, whereas dalessandroi is 2n=28.
Hope this helps.
Best, Kate

 

[KateL]

What is your book called? Sounds neat. Is there an English version (if published in German)?

I have come across one of Olaf’s books: Phragmipedium, Mexipedium, Selenipedium. 2019. (Orchideenzauber Sonderausgabe 10). 650 col. photogr. 144 p. 4to. Hardcover..- In German.
I think there might be an expanded or second edition published in 2021, list on the same website.
Unfortunately, I don’t read German and I don’t think there is a translated version available.

 

[Morja]

I have come across one of Olaf’s books: Phragmipedium, Mexipedium, Selenipedium. 2019. (Orchideenzauber Sonderausgabe 10). 650 col. photogr. 144 p. 4to. Hardcover..- In German.
I think there might be an expanded or second edition published in 2021, list on the same website.
Unfortunately, I don’t read German and I don’t think there is a translated version available.

Thank you! Eric stated above he is helping to translate it to English right now, apparently! So we will all have to keep our eyes open.

 

[BrucherT]

I would love to understand this comment: "I know of only one effort to map the genome of a slipper, at the State University of New York, and that effort required 25 pounds of material (it is/was mexipedium). To do Phrags correctly would require several hundred pounds..."

My god, what does "25 pounds" of Mexipedium look like???? Where would one come by so much Mexipedium? I'm truly asking; I have never heard of "pounds" of any organism being required to run a DNA sequence. Mapping a genome is different but I do not think it's actually necessary in order to determine such genetic distinctions as delineate species.

In mycology, we are running DNA sequences for $1 or less per sequence, yielding high-quality data. DNA science is not my bag but I collect specimens and assist with their preparation regularly. I am trying to understand why orchid sequences would be so very different in terms of process.

 

[Heather]

Marilyn at Windy Hill as a super large pot of it; old photo below…It kind of grows like a weed when it’s happy, so I actually think you could get this together if you wanted to…

 

[alex.sorensen51]

in regards to the dna testing,they are able to take drops of water from a stream,and tell you what species of fish reside in it...so why not the same from soil residue (detritus) from the locale

 

[tenman]

Hi Alex,
I hesitate to weigh in here, but I think you have this backwards. I refer you to the Sept. 2020 article in Orchids (the AOS magazine) by Olaf Gruss (who, along with Dodson, published the original article describing Phragmipedium dalessandroi as a separate species, in Orchidee (Hamburg) in 1996).
It is dalessandroi that has the compact plant with clumping growth habit, and is nonstoloniferous - not besseae, which sometimes has that climbing growth habit.
Frank C. has MUCH more real-world experience than me; he’s a wonderful speaker; I respect his opinion greatly. However, for most of us, there is a practicality in accepting that two species are now recognized by AOS and Kew.
Frank is correct in the sense that there is considerable variability in besseae, as to petal shape, stolon shape, color, etc. Sometimes besseae is stoloniferous, sometimes nonstoloniferous.
The most definitive distinction is one that is currently impractical for me, as a hobbyist, i.e., that the chromosome count for besseae is reported to be 2n=24, whereas dalessandroi is 2n=28.
Hope this helps.
Best, Kate

I am sorry, but the AOS is most definitely NOT a taxonomic aurthority. In one genus alone, Trichopilia, between 25%-30% of the awarded plants are clearly mislabeled. Same goes for Kew - wrong as much as right.

 

[tenman]

Well, I just bought one labeled as such from their live sale in CA last night. It’s in bud so we can discuss what it is when it blooms! I know their labels aren’t always accurate, plus the besseae species debate….so we shall see!

"aren't always": you will find between 25% - 50% of their plants are mislabeled these days depending on what groups you are considering. Often, even the genus is wrong. More often, hybrids sold as species, species mislabeled, etc. They won't do anything about it. They are too busy expanding to worry about correct labels or customer serice. They simply don't care even when confronted with it and do nothing about it.

 

[Tony]

I am sorry, but the AOS is most definitely NOT a taxonomic aurthority. In one genus alone, Trichopilia, between 25%-30% of the awarded plants are clearly mislabeled. Same goes for Kew - wrong as much as right.

The things you find when you start researching prior awards lol

 

[ORG]

What is your book called? Sounds neat. Is there an English version (if published in German)?

This was the first edition, published before Guido's book and Phillip's book was published. Now also the second edition was sold. I think there is only one book more. It was sold also to USA..