At 12:59 PM 7/21/2004 +0200, you wrote:
>>------------------------------
>>
>>Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 12:04:55 -0400
>>From: Prem Subrahmanyam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Subject: [OGD] Orchid species photographs
>>Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>>MIME-Version: 1.0
>>Precedence: list
>>Reply-To: "the OrchidGuide Digest \(OGD\)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>Message: 2
>>
>>Habenaria erichmichaelii [aka H. rhodocheila (pink form)]:
>>
>
>Prem ... what is the type of Habenaria rhodocheila?? ... Is it the pink form ???
>If so, you can't change the name
>
>If it is not the type, but only differs from the type by the flower colour, you can't
>change the name also
>
>Personally, I think there may be enough to warrant separation into two species, but I
>still wonder if it shouldn't be the orange form that gets booted out of the species.
>Does anyone have access to the original botanical description of the species?
>
>Yes ... I have ... but that means several hours of work ... for who ... for you? ...
>Obviously you are not a taxonomist. So don't confuse issues.
>
>If you want to do a taxonomic study, fine ... go to the university and get the
>literature, and start from scratch, Until then, don't play taxonomy ... it is NOT a
>game and you are doing nothing but confusing people.
>
>Who described H. rhodocheila --- look it up
>Who describes H. erichmichaelii ---- look it up
>
>Get the article
>Do the work ... don't ask others to do it for you
>
>And if you are not a taxonomist, keep your fingers out of it
>
>regards
>Guido
>
>Dr. Guido J. Braem
The name that I attached to my photographs is the one that I've
been told by several sources is a proposed revision to Habenaria
rhodocheila by Dr. Christenson. Up until now, H. rhodocheila has
been described as existing as three distinct color forms - pink,
orange (more rarely), and yellow (very, very rarely).
Unlike you, Dr. Braem, those of us who raise orchids as a
hobby would still like to know WHAT IT IS that we're growing. We
try to keep up with the current "in vogue" names that taxonomists
with over-blown egos constantly shuffle and reshuffle in the
hopes that they might stake some lasting claim to fame. And with
regard to the issue of confusing people, taxonomists do this all
of their own without any help. How many times has Epidendrum
cochleatum been reassigned to different genera now...and all within
the span of one lifetime? By my count, it's five now: Epidendrum
cochleatum -> Encyclia cochleata -> Anacheilium cochleatum ->
Prosthechea cochleata -> Anacheilium cochleatum (in Withner's latest
work). I don't know about you, but I find this confusing as hell
without any help from the "non-taxonomists".
But it should be duly noted: botany is not necessarily just for
the botanists. Having minored in botany for my B.S. degree,
this is certainly an avid interest of mine...because of this
interest, I have been the first to record the ocurrence of three
species of orchid in my county in Florida, Platanthera ciliaris,
Platanthera flava, and Zeuxine strateumatica...these were reported
to the biologist/field botanist at the local university who
keeps the herbarium, and he now has specimens of all three of
these plants in his collection, along with a specimen of an
inflorescence of Tipularia discolor, which has been recorded in
this county before, but he only had the hibernal vegetation in
the collection.
Despite your strong hopes and wishes to the contrary, science
will be advanced not only by scientists, but by the "unwashed"
who can be in more places than any body of scientists could ever
be. The simple fact is that you need us...the hobbyists and
dabblers ("meddlers" though we be).
The only references I could find to the original description of H.
rhodocheila is this:
Habenaria rhodocheila Hance 1856
and synonyms:
Habenaria militaris Rchb.f 1886; Habenaria pusila Rchb.f 1878; Habenaria xanthocheila
Ridley 1896
Perhaps instead of pontificating from your lofty exalted throne, you
could assist this "meddler" in pointing him in the direction where
to even begin a search for this information. My understanding is that
the name H. erichmichalii was published by Christenson only very
recently. Or if this is too much effort for you, perhaps someone
else of taxonomic inclination who hasn't forgotten the human trait
of helping a fellow person could step in here.
---Prem
www.premdesign.com
_______________________________________________
the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids
