Does anyone subscribe to The Orchadian? With Jones and
Clements' recent revision of the genus Dendrobium does
anyone know which species are still Dendrobiums? Am I
correct in thinking the genus now contains only those
species formerly classed in the section Dendrobium ie nobile
and its relatives? Does anyone know if the revision has been
formally published yet?
Andrew

a weed.

Mick

How widely accepted is Jones and Clements revision? Even the removal of some
Dends into Dockrilla seems to be sort of unaccepted.

K Barrett

"Andrew" wrote in message
...
Does anyone subscribe to The Orchadian? With Jones and
Clements' recent revision of the genus Dendrobium does
anyone know which species are still Dendrobiums? Am I
correct in thinking the genus now contains only those
species formerly classed in the section Dendrobium ie nobile
and its relatives? Does anyone know if the revision has been
formally published yet?
Andrew

Hi Andrew:
This is the first I've heard of this and am very interested in more info.

Mick:

A WEED??? A WEED??? HUMPH!!! You haven't even got taste in your mouth.
S V

"Mick Fournier" wrote in message ...
a weed.

Mick

Did a quick search online by just placeing the names Jones and clements and
genus dendrobium in the google search engine. Yeilded some interesting
stuff. There is a page on OrcidSafari wayyyy at the bottom, with a
discussion of dockrillia Another link came up with Clements, M. A. and
Jones, D. L. 1997. Cannaeorchis, a new genus of Dendrobiinae (Orchidaceae)
for the taxon previously known as Dendrobium Sw. sect. Macrocladium Schltr.
Lasianthera 1(3): 132-147.

Comber, J. B. and Wood, J. J. 1999. Dendrobium ayubii, a new member of
section Formosae from Sumatra. Orchid Rev. 107(1226): 89-91.

K Barrett
"K Barrett" wrote in message
. ..
How widely accepted is Jones and Clements revision? Even the removal of
some
Dends into Dockrilla seems to be sort of unaccepted.

K Barrett

"Andrew" wrote in message
...
Does anyone subscribe to The Orchadian? With Jones and
Clements' recent revision of the genus Dendrobium does
anyone know which species are still Dendrobiums? Am I
correct in thinking the genus now contains only those
species formerly classed in the section Dendrobium ie nobile
and its relatives? Does anyone know if the revision has been
formally published yet?
Andrew

SV,

I stand firm by my first assessment.

Mick

I expected you to. Thankfully there are enough different kinds, types
and styles of orchids to satisfy almost everyone's tastes. Even those
without.
Take care guy.
S V

"Mick Fournier" wrote in message ...
SV,

I stand firm by my first assessment.

Mick

I keep 3 den's that are also refered to as Dockrillias and also spend
a lot of time looking through much info on Dend's looking for more
species of interest to me. I am constantly running into references to
attempts to split off individual species and/or sections from the
Dendrobium Genus.

I am not any kind of an authority on the subject and do not have any
real interest in the naming or classifying wars. All I am interested
in is finding more orchids that apeal to me and will do reasonably
well in my growing conditions. With that said, the diversity of the
Dend genera will no doubt always cause squabbling over the proper
classifications of those grouped within this genus. Even when some
have been split off there always seems to be dissent and their proper
location is still in doubt, for me anyway. Take a look he

http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/G.../Den-start.htm

The thoroughness of this sites listings may be disputable. I don't
know, but it never the less is formidable. The number of sections in
Dendrobium is staggering. It's almost as if they've used sections to
avoid reclassifying into separate genera. I'm suprised Bulbo's managed
to escape. I think they did. But then, I'm not sure.
My "feeling", for what it's worth, is that any reclassifying of
members of Dendrobium will take many years for it to finally gain
acceptance by a majority of those whose opinions really matter in
resolving this question.

I suppose this can be catagorized as the rantings of one that is
totally ignotrant of the subject. It would probably be right. But I
did get it said. I'm happy.
S V

"K Barrett" wrote in message ...
How widely accepted is Jones and Clements revision? Even the removal of some
Dends into Dockrilla seems to be sort of unaccepted.

K Barrett

"Andrew" wrote in message
...
Does anyone subscribe to The Orchadian? With Jones and
Clements' recent revision of the genus Dendrobium does
anyone know which species are still Dendrobiums? Am I
correct in thinking the genus now contains only those
species formerly classed in the section Dendrobium ie nobile
and its relatives? Does anyone know if the revision has been
formally published yet?
Andrew

Thanks for the site! I had been looking for that one again. I like his
break down for the different sections, and I refer to it - when I can find
it - whenever I need to figure out what dends belong where. (I now have it
bookmarked so I won't lose it again.)

Bulbos are now under attack by the taxonomic hounds of war. Lord knows where
all this will shake out. The last AOS Awards Quarterly had whole sections
with taxonomic synonyms awarded - now if that won't make your hair curl I
don't know what will. Den obtusisepalum is now Den chrysoptera and I have to
remember both names... arrgh. Drives me batty.

K Barrett

"solo_voyager" wrote in message
om...
I keep 3 den's that are also refered to as Dockrillias and also spend
a lot of time looking through much info on Dend's looking for more
species of interest to me. I am constantly running into references to
attempts to split off individual species and/or sections from the
Dendrobium Genus.

I am not any kind of an authority on the subject and do not have any
real interest in the naming or classifying wars. All I am interested
in is finding more orchids that apeal to me and will do reasonably
well in my growing conditions. With that said, the diversity of the
Dend genera will no doubt always cause squabbling over the proper
classifications of those grouped within this genus. Even when some
have been split off there always seems to be dissent and their proper
location is still in doubt, for me anyway. Take a look he

http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/G.../Den-start.htm

The thoroughness of this sites listings may be disputable. I don't
know, but it never the less is formidable. The number of sections in
Dendrobium is staggering. It's almost as if they've used sections to
avoid reclassifying into separate genera. I'm suprised Bulbo's managed
to escape. I think they did. But then, I'm not sure.
My "feeling", for what it's worth, is that any reclassifying of
members of Dendrobium will take many years for it to finally gain
acceptance by a majority of those whose opinions really matter in
resolving this question.

I suppose this can be catagorized as the rantings of one that is
totally ignotrant of the subject. It would probably be right. But I
did get it said. I'm happy.
S V

"K Barrett" wrote in message
...
How widely accepted is Jones and Clements revision? Even the removal of
some
Dends into Dockrilla seems to be sort of unaccepted.

K Barrett

"Andrew" wrote in message
...
Does anyone subscribe to The Orchadian? With Jones and
Clements' recent revision of the genus Dendrobium does
anyone know which species are still Dendrobiums? Am I
correct in thinking the genus now contains only those
species formerly classed in the section Dendrobium ie nobile
and its relatives? Does anyone know if the revision has been
formally published yet?
Andrew

My server/newsreader doesn't seem to be loading Solo Voyager
and Kathy Barrett's replies so I'll give a combined reply to
both.

Australian orchid genera are in the middle of a series of
taxonomic revisions. Genera like Caladenia and Corybas have
been split as have many species. Dendrobium seems to have
got caught up in this as well although it probably was
somewhat necessary. David Jones and Mark Clements are quite
well known in Australian orchid research and are amongst the
taxonomists carrying out these revisions.

The revision was published in an issue of last years
Orchadian (the ANOS Journal). Most of what I've heard has
been filtered through the Victorian ANOS group's journal. I
haven't actually seen the issue (hence my question). The
problem is the Orchadian is not a peer reviewed journal and
the article was not a formal manuscript. It was published as
a precursor to the formal revision and according to the
article the manuscript is to be formally published in the
future. The publication was rushed so that the revision
would be published prior to that of another group.
Regardless of the dubious nature of the publication, local
growers and botanists seem to think the revision will be
accepted.

KB: Dockrillia is now pretty much an accepted genus in
Australia. However, under the RHS Dockrillia hybrids are
still registered as Dendrobiums. This will surely be the
case for hybrids of the revised Dendrobium species.

Mick Fournier wrote:

a weed.

Mick

Personally, I'd save the glypho for the Catts and Phals.

Thank you Andrew for your clarification.

Seems Selby Gardens isn't the only one caught up in a rush to publish their
finding before another group does. (that refers to the Phrag
kovachii/peruvianum troubles here in the States). I had noticed that the RHS
wasn't using Dockrillia, however Julian Shaw seems to be clearing up a lot
of taxonomic backlog, and maybe Dockrillia is among the genera to be dealt
with.

I wonder if you'd get a better answer at the Orchid Guide Digest? Its been
revitalized. You may have to resubscribe and (of course) I don't have that
link off the top of my head. It used to be associated with Akerne Orchids in
(Belgium??). There's probably a current link there.

K Barrett
"Andrew" wrote in message
...
My server/newsreader doesn't seem to be loading Solo Voyager
and Kathy Barrett's replies so I'll give a combined reply to
both.

Australian orchid genera are in the middle of a series of
taxonomic revisions. Genera like Caladenia and Corybas have
been split as have many species. Dendrobium seems to have
got caught up in this as well although it probably was
somewhat necessary. David Jones and Mark Clements are quite
well known in Australian orchid research and are amongst the
taxonomists carrying out these revisions.

The revision was published in an issue of last years
Orchadian (the ANOS Journal). Most of what I've heard has
been filtered through the Victorian ANOS group's journal. I
haven't actually seen the issue (hence my question). The
problem is the Orchadian is not a peer reviewed journal and
the article was not a formal manuscript. It was published as
a precursor to the formal revision and according to the
article the manuscript is to be formally published in the
future. The publication was rushed so that the revision
would be published prior to that of another group.
Regardless of the dubious nature of the publication, local
growers and botanists seem to think the revision will be
accepted.

KB: Dockrillia is now pretty much an accepted genus in
Australia. However, under the RHS Dockrillia hybrids are
still registered as Dendrobiums. This will surely be the
case for hybrids of the revised Dendrobium species.

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to





"K Barrett" wrote in message
et...
Thank you Andrew for your clarification.

Seems Selby Gardens isn't the only one caught up in a rush to publish
their
finding before another group does. (that refers to the Phrag
kovachii/peruvianum troubles here in the States). I had noticed that the
RHS
wasn't using Dockrillia, however Julian Shaw seems to be clearing up a lot
of taxonomic backlog, and maybe Dockrillia is among the genera to be dealt
with.

I wonder if you'd get a better answer at the Orchid Guide Digest? Its been
revitalized. You may have to resubscribe and (of course) I don't have that
link off the top of my head. It used to be associated with Akerne Orchids
in
(Belgium??). There's probably a current link there.

K Barrett
"Andrew" wrote in message
...
My server/newsreader doesn't seem to be loading Solo Voyager
and Kathy Barrett's replies so I'll give a combined reply to
both.

Australian orchid genera are in the middle of a series of
taxonomic revisions. Genera like Caladenia and Corybas have
been split as have many species. Dendrobium seems to have
got caught up in this as well although it probably was
somewhat necessary. David Jones and Mark Clements are quite
well known in Australian orchid research and are amongst the
taxonomists carrying out these revisions.

The revision was published in an issue of last years
Orchadian (the ANOS Journal). Most of what I've heard has
been filtered through the Victorian ANOS group's journal. I
haven't actually seen the issue (hence my question). The
problem is the Orchadian is not a peer reviewed journal and
the article was not a formal manuscript. It was published as
a precursor to the formal revision and according to the
article the manuscript is to be formally published in the
future. The publication was rushed so that the revision
would be published prior to that of another group.
Regardless of the dubious nature of the publication, local
growers and botanists seem to think the revision will be
accepted.

KB: Dockrillia is now pretty much an accepted genus in
Australia. However, under the RHS Dockrillia hybrids are
still registered as Dendrobiums. This will surely be the
case for hybrids of the revised Dendrobium species.

Excelent suggestion K.B. Andrew should be able to obtain some
authoritive answers to his question from the OGD. I'll watch for it
with interest.
Thx

"K Barrett" wrote in message . net...
Thank you Andrew for your clarification.

Seems Selby Gardens isn't the only one caught up in a rush to publish their
finding before another group does. (that refers to the Phrag
kovachii/peruvianum troubles here in the States). I had noticed that the RHS
wasn't using Dockrillia, however Julian Shaw seems to be clearing up a lot
of taxonomic backlog, and maybe Dockrillia is among the genera to be dealt
with.

I wonder if you'd get a better answer at the Orchid Guide Digest? Its been
revitalized. You may have to resubscribe and (of course) I don't have that
link off the top of my head. It used to be associated with Akerne Orchids in
(Belgium??). There's probably a current link there.

"K Barrett" wrote:

I wonder if you'd get a better answer at the Orchid Guide Digest? Its been
revitalized. You may have to resubscribe and (of course) I don't have that
link off the top of my head. It used to be associated with Akerne Orchids in
(Belgium??). There's probably a current link there.


Thanks. I'll try redirecting my question there.