Dendrobium prenticei
 

I think I posted this last year, when it bloomed better. But the ng has been
pretty quiet, so here it is again. As described below, it'sa very variable
species, but this is one typical leaf shape and flower marking.

There is debate over the taxonomy of this plant, along with the closely related
species of D. lichenastrum & D. toressae. All have flat to terete leaves, with
no pseudobulbs. The blooms of toressae are noticeably different from the other
species. Those of lichenastrum & prenticei are both quite variable, but both
vary in the same range of ways - and it's really only the small button shaped
leaf of lichenastrum that distinguishes it from prenticei, the leaves of which
are more elongated (length quite variable between plants), and anything from
flattened to terete. And all variations between those extremes.

If one accepts them as Dendrobes, all three species are usually assigned to
Section Lichenastrum. Another school of thought ascribes then to the genus
Dockrillia - understandable since the Dockrillias all have more or less fleshy
leaves but no pseudobulbs.

David Jones, in his 2006 book, defined a new genus, Davejonesia, to contain
prenticei & lichenastrum, breaking D. prenticei into two species based on the
extremes of leaf shape: Davejonesia prenticei having longer cylindrical to
terete leaves, and Davejonesia auranticopurpurea having shorter flattish leaves.
But he left D. toressae out of this genus completely, assigning it to the
monospecific genus Stilbophyllum (toressae).

Debate, anybody? I'll listen with interest!
Dave Gillingham
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To email me remove the .private from my email address.

Dendrobium prenticei
 

Interesting little thing, isn't it? I don't have the expertise to comment on
the taxonomy, I'm afraid.

Diana

"Dave Gillingham" wrote in message
...
I think I posted this last year, when it bloomed better. But the ng has
been
pretty quiet, so here it is again. As described below, it'sa very
variable
species, but this is one typical leaf shape and flower marking.

There is debate over the taxonomy of this plant, along with the closely
related
species of D. lichenastrum & D. toressae. All have flat to terete leaves,
with
no pseudobulbs. The blooms of toressae are noticeably different from the
other
species. Those of lichenastrum & prenticei are both quite variable, but
both
vary in the same range of ways - and it's really only the small button
shaped
leaf of lichenastrum that distinguishes it from prenticei, the leaves of
which
are more elongated (length quite variable between plants), and anything
from
flattened to terete. And all variations between those extremes.

If one accepts them as Dendrobes, all three species are usually assigned
to
Section Lichenastrum. Another school of thought ascribes then to the
genus
Dockrillia - understandable since the Dockrillias all have more or less
fleshy
leaves but no pseudobulbs.

David Jones, in his 2006 book, defined a new genus, Davejonesia, to
contain
prenticei & lichenastrum, breaking D. prenticei into two species based on
the
extremes of leaf shape: Davejonesia prenticei having longer cylindrical
to
terete leaves, and Davejonesia auranticopurpurea having shorter flattish
leaves.
But he left D. toressae out of this genus completely, assigning it to the
monospecific genus Stilbophyllum (toressae).

Debate, anybody? I'll listen with interest!
Dave Gillingham
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To email me remove the .private from my email address.

Dendrobium prenticei
 

I guess all I was doing really was highlighting just how confusing taxonomic
reviews can get - like the recent discussion about some of the Cattleya
alliance. Not to mention, how confused (& cranky) I get.

On Sat, 8 Sep 2007 15:09:05 -0400, "Diana Kulaga"
wrote:

Interesting little thing, isn't it? I don't have the expertise to comment on
the taxonomy, I'm afraid.

Diana

"Dave Gillingham" wrote in message
.. .
I think I posted this last year, when it bloomed better. But the ng has
been
pretty quiet, so here it is again. As described below, it'sa very
variable
species, but this is one typical leaf shape and flower marking.

There is debate over the taxonomy of this plant, along with the closely
related
species of D. lichenastrum & D. toressae. All have flat to terete leaves,
with
no pseudobulbs. The blooms of toressae are noticeably different from the
other
species. Those of lichenastrum & prenticei are both quite variable, but
both
vary in the same range of ways - and it's really only the small button
shaped
leaf of lichenastrum that distinguishes it from prenticei, the leaves of
which
are more elongated (length quite variable between plants), and anything
from
flattened to terete. And all variations between those extremes.

If one accepts them as Dendrobes, all three species are usually assigned
to
Section Lichenastrum. Another school of thought ascribes then to the
genus
Dockrillia - understandable since the Dockrillias all have more or less
fleshy
leaves but no pseudobulbs.

David Jones, in his 2006 book, defined a new genus, Davejonesia, to
contain
prenticei & lichenastrum, breaking D. prenticei into two species based on
the
extremes of leaf shape: Davejonesia prenticei having longer cylindrical
to
terete leaves, and Davejonesia auranticopurpurea having shorter flattish
leaves.
But he left D. toressae out of this genus completely, assigning it to the
monospecific genus Stilbophyllum (toressae).

Debate, anybody? I'll listen with interest!
Dave Gillingham
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To email me remove the .private from my email address.



Dave Gillingham
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To email me remove the .private from my email address.

Dendrobium prenticei
 

Hi Dave

I tend to follow the more experienced growers at my ANOS group. If they
start using Jones's new names then I figure that they must have agreed to
the nomenclature change. I share your frustration with the changes
especially seeing there have been so many name changes to Australian
orchids.

Cheers

John

"Dave Gillingham" wrote in message
...
I guess all I was doing really was highlighting just how confusing
taxonomic
reviews can get - like the recent discussion about some of the Cattleya
alliance. Not to mention, how confused (& cranky) I get.

On Sat, 8 Sep 2007 15:09:05 -0400, "Diana Kulaga"

wrote:

Interesting little thing, isn't it? I don't have the expertise to comment
on
the taxonomy, I'm afraid.

Diana

"Dave Gillingham" wrote in message
. ..
I think I posted this last year, when it bloomed better. But the ng has
been
pretty quiet, so here it is again. As described below, it'sa very
variable
species, but this is one typical leaf shape and flower marking.

There is debate over the taxonomy of this plant, along with the closely
related
species of D. lichenastrum & D. toressae. All have flat to terete
leaves,
with
no pseudobulbs. The blooms of toressae are noticeably different from
the
other
species. Those of lichenastrum & prenticei are both quite variable, but
both
vary in the same range of ways - and it's really only the small button
shaped
leaf of lichenastrum that distinguishes it from prenticei, the leaves of
which
are more elongated (length quite variable between plants), and anything
from
flattened to terete. And all variations between those extremes.

If one accepts them as Dendrobes, all three species are usually assigned
to
Section Lichenastrum. Another school of thought ascribes then to the
genus
Dockrillia - understandable since the Dockrillias all have more or less
fleshy
leaves but no pseudobulbs.

David Jones, in his 2006 book, defined a new genus, Davejonesia, to
contain
prenticei & lichenastrum, breaking D. prenticei into two species based
on
the
extremes of leaf shape: Davejonesia prenticei having longer cylindrical
to
terete leaves, and Davejonesia auranticopurpurea having shorter flattish
leaves.
But he left D. toressae out of this genus completely, assigning it to
the
monospecific genus Stilbophyllum (toressae).

Debate, anybody? I'll listen with interest!
Dave Gillingham
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To email me remove the .private from my email address.



Dave Gillingham
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To email me remove the .private from my email address.