A plant of P. kolopakingii x P. praestans is coming into flower for me.
It's a big straping thing like you'd expect.

I was trying to find it on the web to know what to expect and am a bit
confused.

Is this one of those that have had the name changed? It looks like Antec
calls praestans as P. glanduliferum and crossed with kolopankingii it would
be P. Hayabusa.

Is this correct? Paph experts?

Good growing,
Gene

Gene Schurg wrote:
A plant of P. kolopakingii x P. praestans is coming into flower for me.
It's a big straping thing like you'd expect.

I was trying to find it on the web to know what to expect and am a bit
confused.

Is this one of those that have had the name changed? It looks like Antec
calls praestans as P. glanduliferum and crossed with kolopankingii it would
be P. Hayabusa.


I'm not sure what they are doing with praestans... Which is a lovely
species, by the way. I do know they have mucked up glanduliferum v.
wilhelminiae. That is now being registered as P. wilhelminiae. Which
changes the names of some very nice Susan Booths to William Ambler. Of
course only if you know one of the parents was var. wilhelminiae,
otherwise I guess they get to stay Susan Booth...

Praestans was accepted as a species for registration purposes through at
least 2001. I didn't see any notice from the registrar that this had
changed, when I was looking through the lists. Guess the way to find
out is to contact the registrar and ask...

P. wilhelminiae x kolo = Hayabusa. If glanduliferum is separate from
wilhelminiae, then this cross is as yet unregistered. If praestans is
separate from either of these two, that is also unregistered. As far as
I can tell.

This is starting to get confusing...


--
Rob's Rules: http://littlefrogfarm.com
1) There is always room for one more orchid
2) There is always room for two more orchids
2a) See rule 1
3) When one has insufficient credit to obtain more
orchids, obtain more credit

I was under the impression that praestans was considered
glanduliferum by the RHS. This is unfortunate since,
according to a very close scrutiny of the type by
Dr. Braem, glanduliferum doesn't exist in cultivation.
No other has been found with the correct staminode.
Which means all the 'glanduliferums' in cultivation are
in fact praestans as are the praestans. But then they
are forced to be registered as glanduliferum.

Check out my Slipper Orchid Forum. We had a recent praestan discussion.
Lots of Paph and Phrag growers on my forum. Here is the link:
http://www.rainbowcomputers.net/forum

Pete
THE SLIPPER ORCHID FORUM

Hi Gene,

This is from Cash (1991). "Growers seeking information about Paph
praestans, a widely used but subsequent synonym for this taxon, must read
Cribb (1987) for historical details of nomenclature. P. praestans is a
synonym for this species, due to its publication subsequent to P.
granduliferum. The unusual situation here involves a name which seems new
to horticulturists though it was given to one of the earliest slippers
described."

A lot of plants are still sold under the name praestans, but I am not sure
if many would argue that there are two different species here. As far as I
know RHS only accepts granduliferum.

Pat


"Gene Schurg" wrote in message
news:VGsge.960$qT1.378@trnddc06...
A plant of P. kolopakingii x P. praestans is coming into flower for me.
It's a big straping thing like you'd expect.

I was trying to find it on the web to know what to expect and am a bit
confused.

Is this one of those that have had the name changed? It looks like Antec
calls praestans as P. glanduliferum and crossed with kolopankingii it
would
be P. Hayabusa.

Is this correct? Paph experts?

Good growing,
Gene