Laelia perrinii and Laelia lobata are missing because they were originally described by Lindley as species of Cattleya. Ron Whitten
Message: 1 Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2008 06:30:34 -0400 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [OGD] Orchids Digest, Vol 10,Issue 211 new cattleya nomenclature To: [email protected] Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed I don't see any mention of L.perrinii, among others (L.tenebrosa, L.lobata, etc.). Anyone know if there will be a further addition to this enumerating those left out or if we should assume the species epithet remains the same though transferred to Cattleya (i.e., C.perrinii), or if in fact, he just forgot some? Frankly though I am glad to see the large artificial 'sophronitis' lumping rejected, I am more comfortable with the earlier classification involving Brasilaelia, etc. - I don't really think the Hoffmannseggellas belong in cattleya for example. Tennis Maynard _______________________________________________ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) [email protected] http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
