Well, there's nothing like a day trip to Germany to land one with two
bizarre phal's. I'm trying to look them up on Google, but there are so
many... I was hoping someone could suggest some further search terms within
the range of phal's. One of these is very green, with gently pink lips and
fuzzy pink markings radiating into the petals but not reaching the edges.
The other is a rich creamy pale yellow with a touch of pale, pale green, and
a most un-naturally candy pink splash in the center, radiating outward into
very blurry pink dots that peter out around half-way out to the edges of the
petals. Any ideas?
--Katrina


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.537 / Virus Database: 332 - Release Date: 11/6/03

"White Monkey" wrote in message
news
Well, there's nothing like a day trip to Germany to land one with two
bizarre phal's. I'm trying to look them up on Google, but there are so
many... I was hoping someone could suggest some further search terms
within
the range of phal's. One of these is very green, with gently pink lips and
fuzzy pink markings radiating into the petals but not reaching the edges.
The other is a rich creamy pale yellow with a touch of pale, pale green,
and
a most un-naturally candy pink splash in the center, radiating outward
into
very blurry pink dots that peter out around half-way out to the edges of
the
petals. Any ideas?
--Katrina


Adding to my post: the Googling has thrown up that the green one looks like
a green version of Phal. King's Ransom 'Sunshine Dolly' if the photo of that
I looked at is representative.
--Katrina


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.537 / Virus Database: 332 - Release Date: 11/6/03

Hello Katrina, It would be impossible to get a name for your Phal, there are
thousands &
thousands of hybrids out there.
Maybe if you contact the grower/vendor, but usually when they sell them
& know the
name, there is a tag.
Bottom line is that, if you must have a name then you have to purchase
one with a
label. No name plants are less inexpensive but the flowers are still
beautiful.
http://www.phalaenopsis.net/photos/p3_yellow.htm
Cheers Wendy

"White Monkey" wrote in message
news
Well, there's nothing like a day trip to Germany to land one with two
bizarre phal's. I'm trying to look them up on Google, but there are so
many... I was hoping someone could suggest some further search terms
within
the range of phal's. One of these is very green, with gently pink lips and
fuzzy pink markings radiating into the petals but not reaching the edges.
The other is a rich creamy pale yellow with a touch of pale, pale green,
and
a most un-naturally candy pink splash in the center, radiating outward
into
very blurry pink dots that peter out around half-way out to the edges of
the
petals. Any ideas?
--Katrina


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.537 / Virus Database: 332 - Release Date: 11/6/03

This is the url I meant to post, showing the various flowers of the same
cross with different clonal
names.
http://www.phalaenopsis.net/photos/p12_orchidworld.htm
Cheers Wendy
"Wendy" wrote in message
news:Zo6sb.27282$Zb7.10574@fed1read01...
Hello Katrina, It would be impossible to get a name for your Phal, there
are
thousands &
thousands of hybrids out there.
Maybe if you contact the grower/vendor, but usually when they sell
them
& know the
name, there is a tag.
Bottom line is that, if you must have a name then you have to purchase
one with a
label. No name plants are less inexpensive but the flowers are still
beautiful.
http://www.phalaenopsis.net/photos/p3_yellow.htm
Cheers Wendy

"White Monkey" wrote in message
news
Well, there's nothing like a day trip to Germany to land one with two
bizarre phal's. I'm trying to look them up on Google, but there are so
many... I was hoping someone could suggest some further search terms
within
the range of phal's. One of these is very green, with gently pink lips
and
fuzzy pink markings radiating into the petals but not reaching the
edges.
The other is a rich creamy pale yellow with a touch of pale, pale green,
and
a most un-naturally candy pink splash in the center, radiating outward
into
very blurry pink dots that peter out around half-way out to the edges of
the
petals. Any ideas?
--Katrina


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.537 / Virus Database: 332 - Release Date: 11/6/03

Hello Katrina, It would be impossible to get a name for your Phal, there
are
thousands &
thousands of hybrids out there.
Maybe if you contact the grower/vendor, but usually when they sell
them
& know the
name, there is a tag.
Bottom line is that, if you must have a name then you have to purchase
one with a
label. No name plants are less inexpensive but the flowers are still
beautiful.
http://www.phalaenopsis.net/photos/p3_yellow.htm
Cheers Wendy


It's not that I must have a name, it's just that I'm interested in having
them when I can, and I enjoy the research process. I'm startled to see you
use the term "impossible"... I'd buy "very difficult and possibly
impossible". I was able to identify a sale-table phal clone I got awhile
back as a "pink stripes", and in the non-phal's I have been able to identify
my wildcat "Doris" I got off a market table just labeled "orchids", but I
also have a purple phal that I am certain is lost, taxonomy-wise, in a maze
of generic hybridization.Thanks for the link to the pics! I understand about
variation plant by plant and even year by year on the same plant, but there
are still some norms, and I maintain hope that with more idle research in my
"free" time, monickers may drift up for these new two. And my cambria. But
no, it's not a big deal to me--I'm getting orchids that really appeal to me
personally, as I come upon them, not ones I have any reason to believe are
worth money or prestige in any way, so it is enough to me that they're
beautiful.
Thanks,
Katrina


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.537 / Virus Database: 332 - Release Date: 11/6/03

"White Monkey" wrote in message
m...
Hello Katrina, It would be impossible to get a name for your Phal, there
are
thousands &
thousands of hybrids out there.
Maybe if you contact the grower/vendor, but usually when they sell
them
& know the
name, there is a tag.
Bottom line is that, if you must have a name then you have to
purchase
one with a
label. No name plants are less inexpensive but the flowers are still
beautiful.
http://www.phalaenopsis.net/photos/p3_yellow.htm
Cheers Wendy


It's not that I must have a name, it's just that I'm interested in having
them when I can, and I enjoy the research process. I'm startled to see you
use the term "impossible"... I'd buy "very difficult and possibly
impossible". I was able to identify a sale-table phal clone I got awhile
back as a "pink stripes", and in the non-phal's I have been able to
identify
my wildcat "Doris" I got off a market table just labeled "orchids", but I

Hi Katrina,

Both you and Wendy are right, to some degree. The problem is that for many
kinds of orchids, there are a great many cultivars that produce flowers that
are difficult to distinguish. If someone has a white phal, but no name for
it, no-one has a hope of identifying the cross that produced it since there
are so many white phals. This is what Wendy is refering to. As well, she
is referring to a situation where you have seen a plant that you want (say,
to order from a supplier who currently doesn't have any in stock), but for
which you don't have a name. But this doesn't apply to all plants, as some
species are more unique or less variable or less able to form hybrids with
other "species" or cultivars than others.

But in principle, it is possible to identify any hybrid if genetic finger
printing data were available for every species/clone that has ever been
grown. Or even if there was sufficent morphometric data for every species
and clone that has ever been grown, it would be possible to unambiguously
identify every species speciment, and give probable hybrid IDs (by computing
the similarity of each hybrid to known/recognized species). But this data
isn't widely available, and I certainly don't want to be the one paying to
collect it. ;-) Of course, if you know someone about as wealthy as Bill
Gates who is interested in the question, I would hire the folk required to
collect the required data once funding is in place. ;-) Both capable
scientists and their wetlabs are quite expensive.

Since you enjoy research, I would encourage you to do plenty, and to start
you may want to look at Eric Christenson's book on phalaenopsis. He deals
primarily with species and naturally occuring hybrids, but reading his work
with a critical eye will give you a sense of what is and what is not
possible, and the kinds of difficulties in identifying plants. But to get
the most out of it, you need to ask questions like, "what is the empirical
basis for this claim?" and "Is that judgement reasonable given the empirical
evidence he has given relating to it?" And once you have extended your
readings to other books on phalanopsis taxonomy, you can begin to ask
questions like "Is this judgement reasonable given all the empirical
evidence I have studied in all these references?" Once you get a better
handle on taxonomy, you will gain an appreciation for the fact that in many
many cases it is not possible to accurately identify an unlabelled
horticultural specimen. At most, you'd be able to give a list of known
cultivars that fit the description of it. And, at the same time, in
numerous other cases, it is possible, though sometimes difficult.

HTH

Ted

Also be aware that even if your orchid has a tag, that tag may be wrong. I
have several that I am sure are mislabeled, so it is still important to do
the research in order to verify what you have. In stores that don't know or
don't care about the orchids, it is all too easy for labels to be misplaced,
but it can happen to vendors that know and care too. At shows, there may be
crowds of people handling labels and replacing them in random pots or moving
seedlings from one tray to another. Always be somewhat suspicious about
what you are buying.
________________
Ken Woodward
Newton, MA
http://kwoodward.net

"White Monkey" wrote in message
m...
Hello Katrina, It would be impossible to get a name for your Phal, there
are
thousands &
thousands of hybrids out there.
Maybe if you contact the grower/vendor, but usually when they sell
them
& know the
name, there is a tag.
Bottom line is that, if you must have a name then you have to
purchase
one with a
label. No name plants are less inexpensive but the flowers are still
beautiful.
http://www.phalaenopsis.net/photos/p3_yellow.htm
Cheers Wendy


It's not that I must have a name, it's just that I'm interested in having
them when I can, and I enjoy the research process. I'm startled to see you
use the term "impossible"... I'd buy "very difficult and possibly
impossible". I was able to identify a sale-table phal clone I got awhile
back as a "pink stripes", and in the non-phal's I have been able to
identify
my wildcat "Doris" I got off a market table just labeled "orchids", but I
also have a purple phal that I am certain is lost, taxonomy-wise, in a
maze
of generic hybridization.Thanks for the link to the pics! I understand
about
variation plant by plant and even year by year on the same plant, but
there
are still some norms, and I maintain hope that with more idle research in
my
"free" time, monickers may drift up for these new two. And my cambria. But
no, it's not a big deal to me--I'm getting orchids that really appeal to
me
personally, as I come upon them, not ones I have any reason to believe are
worth money or prestige in any way, so it is enough to me that they're
beautiful.
Thanks,
Katrina


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.537 / Virus Database: 332 - Release Date: 11/6/03

Both you and Wendy are right, to some degree. The problem is that for
many
kinds of orchids, there are a great many cultivars that produce flowers
that
are difficult to distinguish. If someone has a white phal, but no name
for
it, no-one has a hope of identifying the cross that produced it since
there
are so many white phals. This is what Wendy is refering to.

That's what I thought--meaning, to me, that there still exists a slim chance
of slapping a *probable* idetification on something more unique and
distinctive. Like my probable Calumnara Wildcat Doris.

But in principle, it is possible to identify any hybrid if genetic finger
printing data were available for every species/clone that has ever been
grown.

Well, sure. Bear in mind, with eyeballing I was hoping to achieve a
[probable/possible] name like "Phal Pink Stripes derivative" instead of one
like "Phal. (Brother Spots x Brother Purple) 'Very Red' x Dtps. (Kelsie
Takasaki x Brother Lawrence) Brilliance". But I do realize the difficulties.

Since you enjoy research, I would encourage you to do plenty, and to start
you may want to look at Eric Christenson's book on phalaenopsis.

It would require putting it on my Amazon wish list, but I'll do that right
away and hope someone gets it for me next month! They might have it at the
local library in Dutch, if it's been out long enough to be picked up for
translation--I'll have a look.

He deals
primarily with species and naturally occuring hybrids, but reading his
work
with a critical eye will give you a sense of what is and what is not
possible, and the kinds of difficulties in identifying plants. But to get
the most out of it, you need to ask questions like, "what is the empirical
basis for this claim?" and "Is that judgement reasonable given the
empirical
evidence he has given relating to it?" And once you have extended your
readings to other books on phalanopsis taxonomy, you can begin to ask
questions like "Is this judgement reasonable given all the empirical
evidence I have studied in all these references?"

Understood. Isn't that just an element of good research?

Once you get a better
handle on taxonomy, you will gain an appreciation for the fact that in
many
many cases it is not possible to accurately identify an unlabelled
horticultural specimen.

Actually, I have a very good grounding in zoological taxonomy (old and new)
and know a fair bit about herbs' and spices' names too, so I do understand
what you mean, and it won't be too difficult to pick up the new terms.

I even once had a job that often involved trying to apply a name under which
to sell finches that had come out of an aviary that had been undergoing
uncontrolled hybridization in someone's back yard for decades. Quite a lot
of them can cross-breed, and not very many of the offsring come up mules.
Often it was totally impossible, but we'd try--"Call it a Society Siskin",
"Call it a Zebra Bleu"... so I won't be surprised if the very best I can do
with the phal's turns out to be, say, "Probably some golden sunshine
hybrid". But I'd like to give narrowing it down that far the old college
try!

Thanks very much for your input,

Katrina


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.537 / Virus Database: 332 - Release Date: 11/6/03

"kenwoodward" wrote in message
...
Also be aware that even if your orchid has a tag, that tag may be wrong.
I
have several that I am sure are mislabeled, so it is still important to do
the research in order to verify what you have. In stores that don't know
or
don't care about the orchids, it is all too easy for labels to be
misplaced,
but it can happen to vendors that know and care too. At shows, there may
be
crowds of people handling labels and replacing them in random pots or
moving
seedlings from one tray to another. Always be somewhat suspicious about
what you are buying.


No kidding! That is VERY good advice. Even as I was buying this miltonia,
here, I knew it obviously wasn't a cymbidium, which was what the label said.
And my Wildcat Doris (probable) was on a table just labeled "orchids", but
had a tag in it that said "odontoglossum". I had to look at dozens and
dozens of odontoglossums before I decided "definitively" that my niggling
little instinct was (almost certainly) right, and that this plant might be
related to those or hybridized from them, but is not, on its own, purely
one. Then I widened my search terms and found that this plant resembles
closely a great number of Wildcat Doris strains and plants online, and not
so strongly other wildcats or other orchids, so that's what I'm calling it
(pending any further information).

The good news is that a digital camera has descended into my husband's life
(and mine, once his new-toy-syndrome wears off and I can get my hands on
it), so I'll be posting some of these soon and will ask people for
suggestions and input on these fellas. Unfortunately, the wildcat's done
blooming for this year, so that one'll have to wait.

Thanks,

Katrina


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.537 / Virus Database: 332 - Release Date: 11/6/03

"White Monkey" wrote in message
m...
He deals
primarily with species and naturally occuring hybrids, but reading his
work
with a critical eye will give you a sense of what is and what is not
possible, and the kinds of difficulties in identifying plants. But to
get
the most out of it, you need to ask questions like, "what is the
empirical
basis for this claim?" and "Is that judgement reasonable given the
empirical
evidence he has given relating to it?" And once you have extended your
readings to other books on phalanopsis taxonomy, you can begin to ask
questions like "Is this judgement reasonable given all the empirical
evidence I have studied in all these references?"

Understood. Isn't that just an element of good research?

Yes, but you'd be surprised at the number of undergraduate students I have
met who seem to believe that if it is written, it must be true, and who
consequently are baffled when two or more souces don't agree. Some of these
are even naive enough to believe everything they read in the newspaper.

Once you get a better
handle on taxonomy, you will gain an appreciation for the fact that in
many
many cases it is not possible to accurately identify an unlabelled
horticultural specimen.

Actually, I have a very good grounding in zoological taxonomy (old and
new)
and know a fair bit about herbs' and spices' names too, so I do understand
what you mean, and it won't be too difficult to pick up the new terms.

I even once had a job that often involved trying to apply a name under
which
to sell finches that had come out of an aviary that had been undergoing
uncontrolled hybridization in someone's back yard for decades. Quite a lot
of them can cross-breed, and not very many of the offsring come up mules.
Often it was totally impossible, but we'd try--"Call it a Society Siskin",
"Call it a Zebra Bleu"... so I won't be surprised if the very best I can
do
with the phal's turns out to be, say, "Probably some golden sunshine
hybrid". But I'd like to give narrowing it down that far the old college
try!

So you've encountered the kind of impossibility that Wendy was speaking of,
but in a slightly different context. As a theoretical ecologist, I tend to
be quite critical of taxonomic work as many classifications strike me as
suspect. As an example, in Canada we have one native species of carp
(IIRC), and another group of fish that some taxonomist has called wild
goldfish, and these two have been placed in different genera. However,
morphometrically, they are identical apart from minor differences in the
number of pharyngeal teeth, something that can be checked only by dissecting
the specimen. When the two are in different lakes, only an expert can
distinguish them, but when they are in the same lake, they hybridize so
readily that not even an expert has a hope of distinguishing them. And,
ecologically, they are identical. They eat the same things, and they use
the same habitat in the same way. Their behaviour is identical. So this is
a case where their classification into even separate species let alone into
different genera is wholly unjustified and indefensible. But, when
discussing this instance with a professor of taxonomy, he could not give any
adequate reason for placing them in different genera but at the same time,
he claimed that it was legitimate and that I ought to just take the
taxonomist's word for it.

If I was in your position WRT the finches, I would likely have just labelled
them as finches and been done with it, unless the kind of finch was
unambiguously clear. After all, does being able to call it a Zebra Blue
rather than just another finch add significantly to the value of the bird
that is greater than the cost of paying someone to do a thorough taxonomic
analysis? I guess, if someone wanted to pay me to do it, I would, but I
probably wouldn't pay someone else to do it.

Cheers,

Ted

If I was in your position WRT the finches, I would likely have just
labelled
them as finches and been done with it, unless the kind of finch was
unambiguously clear. After all, does being able to call it a Zebra Blue
rather than just another finch add significantly to the value of the bird
that is greater than the cost of paying someone to do a thorough taxonomic
analysis? I guess, if someone wanted to pay me to do it, I would, but I
probably wouldn't pay someone else to do it.
Cheers,
Ted


I sure wouldn't pay anybody to do it! This was in the mid-80's, during that
brief, weird period when exotic finches and reptiles and aquarium fish were
middle-class status symbols in Southern California. The wholesaler got it
(temporarily correctly) into her head that calling something "Zebra Bleu"
and changing its order-form text to, "The hardiness of a Zebra with the
delicate shades of a Cordon Bleu" somehow DID make it more monetarily
valuable than calling it a "probable cross between a Zebra and a Bleu and
maybe some others, what we pulled out of the Big Cage". I really enjoyed the
job, because I got paid to catch a small bird, put it in a cage with some
food and water and sometimes a member of the (probably) opposite sex (can't
always tell), and sit in the sun observing it for anything I could pull out
that might make a tentative and no-doubt simplistic trait
identification--one yellow-edged primary, for example, or a tendency to
iridescence. A blue fleck behind the eye, high nares. Yellow under the
wings. Jumping a lot, or hanging upside down a lot. Behaviors like
singing--and, if it did sing, did it sound like anything purebred that was
out there? Usually I was able to make a semi-convincing "diagnosis", really
the best I think anyone could have done under the circumstances. "Luckily",
these bad old trendy days are gone, and we're back to "Gimme a brown one
that chirps pretty--do I gotta feed it every day?"

I no longer work in this industry.

--Katrina


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.537 / Virus Database: 332 - Release Date: 11/6/03