Does anyone know the real name of this species? The name on the label is
not recognised by Kew. The grower says that it came from Thailand. The
colours are quite lovely and I would love one of these but not sure what I
should be ordering.
~John

Looks very much like Aerides flabellata. If you are sure that it is a
species and not some hybrid, then I am sure it is flabellata!

Greets, Niek

John Varigos schreef:
Does anyone know the real name of this species? The name on the label is
not recognised by Kew. The grower says that it came from Thailand. The
colours are quite lovely and I would love one of these but not sure what I
should be ordering.
~John

I'm betting its a hybrid. Phairot is a company's name. Which doesn't mean
they (he) couldn't have discovered a species...

K Barrett

"Niek Hanckmann" wrote in message
...
Looks very much like Aerides flabellata. If you are sure that it is a
species and not some hybrid, then I am sure it is flabellata!

Greets, Niek

John Varigos schreef:
Does anyone know the real name of this species? The name on the label is
not recognised by Kew. The grower says that it came from Thailand. The
colours are quite lovely and I would love one of these but not sure what
I should be ordering.
~John

John,

Eric Christenson says it's a hybrid, possibly falcata x flabellata.

-Eric in SF
www.orchidphotos.org

"John Varigos" wrote in message
om...
Does anyone know the real name of this species? The name on the label is
not recognised by Kew. The grower says that it came from Thailand. The
colours are quite lovely and I would love one of these but not sure what I
should be ordering.
~John

Thanks Niek, Kathy and Eric for the help in IDing this one. I am devastated
that this is not a species because it is so nice.

Cheers

John

"Eric Hunt" wrote in message
...
John,

Eric Christenson says it's a hybrid, possibly falcata x flabellata.

-Eric in SF
www.orchidphotos.org

"John Varigos" wrote in message
om...
Does anyone know the real name of this species? The name on the label is
not recognised by Kew. The grower says that it came from Thailand. The
colours are quite lovely and I would love one of these but not sure what
I should be ordering.
~John

Let's not be a species snob, John. Buy the orchid if you like it. *G*

K Barrett

"John Varigos" wrote in message
om...
Thanks Niek, Kathy and Eric for the help in IDing this one. I am
devastated that this is not a species because it is so nice.

Cheers

John

"Eric Hunt" wrote in message
...
John,

Eric Christenson says it's a hybrid, possibly falcata x flabellata.

-Eric in SF
www.orchidphotos.org

"John Varigos" wrote in message
om...
Does anyone know the real name of this species? The name on the label
is not recognised by Kew. The grower says that it came from Thailand.
The colours are quite lovely and I would love one of these but not sure
what I should be ordering.
~John

Speaking of species, recently we had an assignment on creating
'amphidiploids' and using them in a theorectical hybridizing project.

Thank god I had a few contacts through the internet to help me
learn/understand what an amphidiploid is. Not that I ever truly grasped much
of what they were telling me. My pea-brain interpreted an amphidiploid as a
polyploid or 4n plant, which is a gross oversimplification of the term and
concept.

Anyway, Marilyn Light passed along this URL about polyploid evolution that
I found interesting. In it the author quotes Soltis and Soltis who (I
believe I'm reading this right) are researching the idea that way back at
the beginning of angiosperms, flowering plants had very few chromosomes (4?
8?) and that, in nature, improper gametogenesis happens much more frequently
than we think is does. Leading to a higher production rate of polyploids
than previously understood. And, as we all know, the "4n" plants
out-compete the '2n' plants. Therefore they posit that present day flowering
plants with their present day chromosome numbers are the result of millenia
of natural polyploid selection.
http://www.public.iastate.edu/~mbhat...yevolution.pdf

I'm not sure if that's the same as the 'first flower' idea that a different
group is chasing down, the same way researchers at Berkeley chased down
'Eve' using mitichondrial/extra-nuclear DNA.

But its interesting.

K Barrett

In case you wondered, my theotectical project involved putting Laelia lundii
onto either B. cucullata, Soph. cernua or L alaorii in order to capitalize
on that great lip. Selfing the most interesting ones, treating with
colchicine to create the amphidiploid, then putting that on some of
Granier's large floofy blue orchds (whch have to be 4n by now) or continuing
with small orchids for the hobby greenhouse by putting it onto L (Brazilia?)
sincorana 4n etc.

See how we waste our time? LOL!!


"K Barrett" wrote in message
...
Let's not be a species snob, John. Buy the orchid if you like it. *G*

K Barrett

"John Varigos" wrote in message
om...
Thanks Niek, Kathy and Eric for the help in IDing this one. I am
devastated that this is not a species because it is so nice.

Cheers

John

"Eric Hunt" wrote in message
...
John,

Eric Christenson says it's a hybrid, possibly falcata x flabellata.

-Eric in SF
www.orchidphotos.org

"John Varigos" wrote in message
om...
Does anyone know the real name of this species? The name on the label
is not recognised by Kew. The grower says that it came from Thailand.
The colours are quite lovely and I would love one of these but not sure
what I should be ordering.
~John

This is all way above my head, Kathy. Heck I'm have trouble with the math
ratio of a Hozon Siphon!
But reading your post made me think of that "Glow in the dark" story on
orchids. Do you remember it?
Not sure if that was for real either.
Cheers Wendy
"K Barrett" wrote in message
. ..
Speaking of species, recently we had an assignment on creating
'amphidiploids' and using them in a theorectical hybridizing project.

Thank god I had a few contacts through the internet to help me
learn/understand what an amphidiploid is. Not that I ever truly grasped
much of what they were telling me. My pea-brain interpreted an
amphidiploid as a polyploid or 4n plant, which is a gross
oversimplification of the term and concept.

Anyway, Marilyn Light passed along this URL about polyploid evolution
that I found interesting. In it the author quotes Soltis and Soltis who
(I believe I'm reading this right) are researching the idea that way back
at the beginning of angiosperms, flowering plants had very few chromosomes
(4? 8?) and that, in nature, improper gametogenesis happens much more
frequently than we think is does. Leading to a higher production rate of
polyploids than previously understood. And, as we all know, the "4n"
plants out-compete the '2n' plants. Therefore they posit that present day
flowering plants with their present day chromosome numbers are the result
of millenia of natural polyploid selection.
http://www.public.iastate.edu/~mbhat...yevolution.pdf

I'm not sure if that's the same as the 'first flower' idea that a
different group is chasing down, the same way researchers at Berkeley
chased down 'Eve' using mitichondrial/extra-nuclear DNA.

But its interesting.

K Barrett

In case you wondered, my theotectical project involved putting Laelia
lundii onto either B. cucullata, Soph. cernua or L alaorii in order to
capitalize on that great lip. Selfing the most interesting ones, treating
with colchicine to create the amphidiploid, then putting that on some of
Granier's large floofy blue orchds (whch have to be 4n by now) or
continuing with small orchids for the hobby greenhouse by putting it onto
L (Brazilia?) sincorana 4n etc.

See how we waste our time? LOL!!


"K Barrett" wrote in message
...
Let's not be a species snob, John. Buy the orchid if you like it. *G*

K Barrett

"John Varigos" wrote in message
om...
Thanks Niek, Kathy and Eric for the help in IDing this one. I am
devastated that this is not a species because it is so nice.

Cheers

John

"Eric Hunt" wrote in message
...
John,

Eric Christenson says it's a hybrid, possibly falcata x flabellata.

-Eric in SF
www.orchidphotos.org

"John Varigos" wrote in message
om...
Does anyone know the real name of this species? The name on the label
is not recognised by Kew. The grower says that it came from Thailand.
The colours are quite lovely and I would love one of these but not
sure what I should be ordering.
~John

Ha! That's right! The lightning bug DNA cut into a Vanda's DNA.
Supposedly increased the fluorescence of the color. The prof who made the
cross sold the plant for bucoup bucks on eBay

K Barrett

"Wendy7" wrote in message
...
This is all way above my head, Kathy. Heck I'm have trouble with the math
ratio of a Hozon Siphon!
But reading your post made me think of that "Glow in the dark" story on
orchids. Do you remember it?
Not sure if that was for real either.
Cheers Wendy
"K Barrett" wrote in message
. ..
Speaking of species, recently we had an assignment on creating
'amphidiploids' and using them in a theorectical hybridizing project.

Thank god I had a few contacts through the internet to help me
learn/understand what an amphidiploid is. Not that I ever truly grasped
much of what they were telling me. My pea-brain interpreted an
amphidiploid as a polyploid or 4n plant, which is a gross
oversimplification of the term and concept.

Anyway, Marilyn Light passed along this URL about polyploid evolution
that I found interesting. In it the author quotes Soltis and Soltis who
(I believe I'm reading this right) are researching the idea that way back
at the beginning of angiosperms, flowering plants had very few
chromosomes (4? 8?) and that, in nature, improper gametogenesis happens
much more frequently than we think is does. Leading to a higher
production rate of polyploids than previously understood. And, as we all
know, the "4n" plants out-compete the '2n' plants. Therefore they posit
that present day flowering plants with their present day chromosome
numbers are the result of millenia of natural polyploid selection.
http://www.public.iastate.edu/~mbhat...yevolution.pdf

I'm not sure if that's the same as the 'first flower' idea that a
different group is chasing down, the same way researchers at Berkeley
chased down 'Eve' using mitichondrial/extra-nuclear DNA.

But its interesting.

K Barrett

In case you wondered, my theotectical project involved putting Laelia
lundii onto either B. cucullata, Soph. cernua or L alaorii in order to
capitalize on that great lip. Selfing the most interesting ones,
treating with colchicine to create the amphidiploid, then putting that on
some of Granier's large floofy blue orchds (whch have to be 4n by now) or
continuing with small orchids for the hobby greenhouse by putting it onto
L (Brazilia?) sincorana 4n etc.

See how we waste our time? LOL!!


"K Barrett" wrote in message
...
Let's not be a species snob, John. Buy the orchid if you like it. *G*

K Barrett

"John Varigos" wrote in message
om...
Thanks Niek, Kathy and Eric for the help in IDing this one. I am
devastated that this is not a species because it is so nice.

Cheers

John

"Eric Hunt" wrote in message
...
John,

Eric Christenson says it's a hybrid, possibly falcata x flabellata.

-Eric in SF
www.orchidphotos.org

"John Varigos" wrote in message
om...
Does anyone know the real name of this species? The name on the
label is not recognised by Kew. The grower says that it came from
Thailand. The colours are quite lovely and I would love one of these
but not sure what I should be ordering.
~John

I am tempted but when I look at Flickr/ABPO and see so many beautiful
species that I could grow instead, I will just enjoy viewing other people's
postings. In reality I just don't have enough room to start on hybrids -
the species are vying for the finite space available!

John


"K Barrett" wrote in message
...
Let's not be a species snob, John. Buy the orchid if you like it. *G*

K Barrett

"John Varigos" wrote in message
om...
Thanks Niek, Kathy and Eric for the help in IDing this one. I am
devastated that this is not a species because it is so nice.

Cheers

John

"Eric Hunt" wrote in message
...
John,

Eric Christenson says it's a hybrid, possibly falcata x flabellata.

-Eric in SF
www.orchidphotos.org

"John Varigos" wrote in message
om...
Does anyone know the real name of this species? The name on the label
is not recognised by Kew. The grower says that it came from Thailand.
The colours are quite lovely and I would love one of these but not sure
what I should be ordering.
~John

Interesting paper, Kathy. I am trying to digest it.

Not being a geneticists having only done first year genetics at University
as part of Biology 101, my understanding is (simplistically) if you cross a
tetraploid with a diploid don't you get a triploid which is nominally
sterile? Therefore, if a plant in the wild spontaneously mutated to a 4n
then most likely all the crosses would then be with 2n plants (unless there
was another 4n somewhere nearby) and the ensuing seedlings would be 3n and
probably sterile. Is this nature's way of preserving the status quo?

I'm sure there are more learned people out there who will correct me.

Cheers

John


"K Barrett" wrote in message
. ..
Speaking of species, recently we had an assignment on creating
'amphidiploids' and using them in a theorectical hybridizing project.

Thank god I had a few contacts through the internet to help me
learn/understand what an amphidiploid is. Not that I ever truly grasped
much of what they were telling me. My pea-brain interpreted an
amphidiploid as a polyploid or 4n plant, which is a gross
oversimplification of the term and concept.

Anyway, Marilyn Light passed along this URL about polyploid evolution
that I found interesting. In it the author quotes Soltis and Soltis who
(I believe I'm reading this right) are researching the idea that way back
at the beginning of angiosperms, flowering plants had very few chromosomes
(4? 8?) and that, in nature, improper gametogenesis happens much more
frequently than we think is does. Leading to a higher production rate of
polyploids than previously understood. And, as we all know, the "4n"
plants out-compete the '2n' plants. Therefore they posit that present day
flowering plants with their present day chromosome numbers are the result
of millenia of natural polyploid selection.
http://www.public.iastate.edu/~mbhat...yevolution.pdf

I'm not sure if that's the same as the 'first flower' idea that a
different group is chasing down, the same way researchers at Berkeley
chased down 'Eve' using mitichondrial/extra-nuclear DNA.

But its interesting.

K Barrett

In case you wondered, my theotectical project involved putting Laelia
lundii onto either B. cucullata, Soph. cernua or L alaorii in order to
capitalize on that great lip. Selfing the most interesting ones, treating
with colchicine to create the amphidiploid, then putting that on some of
Granier's large floofy blue orchds (whch have to be 4n by now) or
continuing with small orchids for the hobby greenhouse by putting it onto
L (Brazilia?) sincorana 4n etc.

See how we waste our time? LOL!!


"K Barrett" wrote in message
...
Let's not be a species snob, John. Buy the orchid if you like it. *G*

K Barrett

"John Varigos" wrote in message
om...
Thanks Niek, Kathy and Eric for the help in IDing this one. I am
devastated that this is not a species because it is so nice.

Cheers

John

"Eric Hunt" wrote in message
...
John,

Eric Christenson says it's a hybrid, possibly falcata x flabellata.

-Eric in SF
www.orchidphotos.org

"John Varigos" wrote in message
om...
Does anyone know the real name of this species? The name on the label
is not recognised by Kew. The grower says that it came from Thailand.
The colours are quite lovely and I would love one of these but not
sure what I should be ordering.
~John

Unless it selfs.

K Barrett

"John Varigos" wrote in message
om...
Interesting paper, Kathy. I am trying to digest it.

Not being a geneticists having only done first year genetics at University
as part of Biology 101, my understanding is (simplistically) if you cross
a tetraploid with a diploid don't you get a triploid which is nominally
sterile? Therefore, if a plant in the wild spontaneously mutated to a 4n
then most likely all the crosses would then be with 2n plants (unless
there was another 4n somewhere nearby) and the ensuing seedlings would be
3n and probably sterile. Is this nature's way of preserving the status
quo?

I'm sure there are more learned people out there who will correct me.

Cheers

John


"K Barrett" wrote in message
. ..
Speaking of species, recently we had an assignment on creating
'amphidiploids' and using them in a theorectical hybridizing project.

Thank god I had a few contacts through the internet to help me
learn/understand what an amphidiploid is. Not that I ever truly grasped
much of what they were telling me. My pea-brain interpreted an
amphidiploid as a polyploid or 4n plant, which is a gross
oversimplification of the term and concept.

Anyway, Marilyn Light passed along this URL about polyploid evolution
that I found interesting. In it the author quotes Soltis and Soltis who
(I believe I'm reading this right) are researching the idea that way back
at the beginning of angiosperms, flowering plants had very few
chromosomes (4? 8?) and that, in nature, improper gametogenesis happens
much more frequently than we think is does. Leading to a higher
production rate of polyploids than previously understood. And, as we all
know, the "4n" plants out-compete the '2n' plants. Therefore they posit
that present day flowering plants with their present day chromosome
numbers are the result of millenia of natural polyploid selection.
http://www.public.iastate.edu/~mbhat...yevolution.pdf

I'm not sure if that's the same as the 'first flower' idea that a
different group is chasing down, the same way researchers at Berkeley
chased down 'Eve' using mitichondrial/extra-nuclear DNA.

But its interesting.

K Barrett

In case you wondered, my theotectical project involved putting Laelia
lundii onto either B. cucullata, Soph. cernua or L alaorii in order to
capitalize on that great lip. Selfing the most interesting ones,
treating with colchicine to create the amphidiploid, then putting that on
some of Granier's large floofy blue orchds (whch have to be 4n by now) or
continuing with small orchids for the hobby greenhouse by putting it onto
L (Brazilia?) sincorana 4n etc.

See how we waste our time? LOL!!


"K Barrett" wrote in message
...
Let's not be a species snob, John. Buy the orchid if you like it. *G*

K Barrett

"John Varigos" wrote in message
om...
Thanks Niek, Kathy and Eric for the help in IDing this one. I am
devastated that this is not a species because it is so nice.

Cheers

John

"Eric Hunt" wrote in message
...
John,

Eric Christenson says it's a hybrid, possibly falcata x flabellata.

-Eric in SF
www.orchidphotos.org

"John Varigos" wrote in message
om...
Does anyone know the real name of this species? The name on the
label is not recognised by Kew. The grower says that it came from
Thailand. The colours are quite lovely and I would love one of these
but not sure what I should be ordering.
~John

Good point.


"K Barrett" wrote in message
...
Unless it selfs.

K Barrett

"John Varigos" wrote in message
om...
Interesting paper, Kathy. I am trying to digest it.

Not being a geneticists having only done first year genetics at
University as part of Biology 101, my understanding is (simplistically)
if you cross a tetraploid with a diploid don't you get a triploid which
is nominally sterile? Therefore, if a plant in the wild spontaneously
mutated to a 4n then most likely all the crosses would then be with 2n
plants (unless there was another 4n somewhere nearby) and the ensuing
seedlings would be 3n and probably sterile. Is this nature's way of
preserving the status quo?

I'm sure there are more learned people out there who will correct me.

Cheers

John


"K Barrett" wrote in message
. ..
Speaking of species, recently we had an assignment on creating
'amphidiploids' and using them in a theorectical hybridizing project.

Thank god I had a few contacts through the internet to help me
learn/understand what an amphidiploid is. Not that I ever truly grasped
much of what they were telling me. My pea-brain interpreted an
amphidiploid as a polyploid or 4n plant, which is a gross
oversimplification of the term and concept.

Anyway, Marilyn Light passed along this URL about polyploid evolution
that I found interesting. In it the author quotes Soltis and Soltis who
(I believe I'm reading this right) are researching the idea that way
back at the beginning of angiosperms, flowering plants had very few
chromosomes (4? 8?) and that, in nature, improper gametogenesis happens
much more frequently than we think is does. Leading to a higher
production rate of polyploids than previously understood. And, as we
all know, the "4n" plants out-compete the '2n' plants. Therefore they
posit that present day flowering plants with their present day
chromosome numbers are the result of millenia of natural polyploid
selection.
http://www.public.iastate.edu/~mbhat...yevolution.pdf

I'm not sure if that's the same as the 'first flower' idea that a
different group is chasing down, the same way researchers at Berkeley
chased down 'Eve' using mitichondrial/extra-nuclear DNA.

But its interesting.

K Barrett

In case you wondered, my theotectical project involved putting Laelia
lundii onto either B. cucullata, Soph. cernua or L alaorii in order to
capitalize on that great lip. Selfing the most interesting ones,
treating with colchicine to create the amphidiploid, then putting that
on some of Granier's large floofy blue orchds (whch have to be 4n by
now) or continuing with small orchids for the hobby greenhouse by
putting it onto L (Brazilia?) sincorana 4n etc.

See how we waste our time? LOL!!


"K Barrett" wrote in message
...
Let's not be a species snob, John. Buy the orchid if you like it. *G*

K Barrett

"John Varigos" wrote in message
om...
Thanks Niek, Kathy and Eric for the help in IDing this one. I am
devastated that this is not a species because it is so nice.

Cheers

John

"Eric Hunt" wrote in message
...
John,

Eric Christenson says it's a hybrid, possibly falcata x flabellata.

-Eric in SF
www.orchidphotos.org

"John Varigos" wrote in message
om...
Does anyone know the real name of this species? The name on the
label is not recognised by Kew. The grower says that it came from
Thailand. The colours are quite lovely and I would love one of these
but not sure what I should be ordering.
~John