Hello Joanna!

I bought a flask last month of this cross:

Phal. Penang Girl X Phal. bellina

The seller told me there were about 25 plants in my flask but I found 42!
I`m plannig to keep some of them of course and I will sell the rest for a
HIV/AIDS charity event next year .

Claude

"J Fortuna" wrote in message
news:RTXwd.160$_62.22@trnddc01...
| Claude,
|
| The last 42, is that a flask (or a compot)?
|
| Are you counting keikies? I did not count keikies that live with the
mother
| plant as separate plants in my 31 plant count -- two of my pants currently
| have a keikie, and I am really hoping that the phal equestris will decide
to
| have one this time (it's close to the end of this blooming season, so I'm
| watching it for signs of keikie).
|
| Are you intending to keep all these plants when they mature, or are you
| planning to give them away or exchange or something? I would think that if
| they are the same hybrid or same species that 42 of them would be rather
| much once they mature ... of course that assumes that they all will
mature,
| what's the life-expectancy of phals in flask or in compot? I once read an
| article somewhere that only a certain % of such plants are likely to
survive
| and mature, but I don't know how current and how reliable that article
was.
| I hope it was not right, since I would think that for someone who treats
| each plant as an individual, watching the number dwindle would be
| depressing. If that's what having a flask is like, I don't think I want
one
| any time soon. Or do I have a misconception here based on that article?
| Don't know who wrote it, and where I saw it, it's been a while, but this
| much has staid with me.
|
| Joanna
|
| "Phalguy" wrote in message
| ...
| Hello Joanna!
|
| My collection consist of:
|
| 37 Phals
| 2 Oncidium
| 2 Paph
| and 42 phals babies
|
| Claude
|
| "J Fortuna" wrote in message
| news:43Xwd.308$1U6.157@trnddc09...
| | This post was inspired by Dave Gillingham's moving story in the Who We
| Are
| | thread (which by the way I continue to enjoy immensely, and am very
glad
| to
| | read each new post there).
| |
| | Dave's story makes me wonder what the cutoff point is for when a
| collection
| | becomes to large to rejoice over every individual plant's new leaf,
new
| | root, and new spike. My collection currently consists of 31 orchids,
and
| I
| | still watch every one carefully and rejoice over each activity of each
| | plant.
| |
| | I know that Claude also does that, and I have the impression that
| Claude's
| | collection is somewhat larger than mine, though I'm not sure about
that.
| I
| | checked Claude's post in Who We Are as well as Claude's Web site, but
I
| did
| | not see the total number of plants in your collection, Claude?
| |
| | Anyway, it appears that somewhere between 31 plants (my current
number)
| and
| | about 200 (Dave's current number) one can no longer keep track of each
| as
| an
| | individual and rejoice in each one. I wonder what the cutoff number
is?
| Of
| | course, I know that this cutoff will vary somewhat based on the
| individual's
| | determination and the amount of time available to spend with plants
and
| | maybe some other variables, but: What is the largest number of orchids
| in
| a
| | collection that a single human being can report keeping track of in an
| | individualized way, rejoicing over each one's activity?
| |
| | This is not just a rhetorical question. I really want to know. And
then
| I
| | will try not to exceed that number if at all possible. Well, probably
it
| | will not be possible since I am an orchid addict and I feel the
craving
| for
| | new orchids at most a month after the last orchid was bought. But I
| might
| | try to postpone the inevitable if I know that exceeding x amount will
| lead
| | to a dire consequence such as the de-indivualization of individual
| orchids.
| |
| | Joanna
| |
| |
|
|
|
|