Re: [OGD] Australian Terrestrial Lip Details.
In a message dated 9/21/08 6:00:29 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, Kathy Barrett writes: "What's the purpose of the raised 'hooks' on the lips? At first I thought they encouraged at pollinator to come in to the center, but then I realized they were pointing in the 'wrong' direction, keeping insects out. Are they sticky, to trap insects at the column? Or have nectar on them as an attractant? Any discussion would be interesting." Judging from the close up pictures of two of the Arachnorchis, the flower appears to be offering pseudopollen in the form of yellow masses at the base of the lip. The curved "hooks" might serve to position the insect so it picks up pollinia as it backs out of the flower. Or perhaps irritates it so it jumps up into the column ;-). They might also be directional signals under UV light, or produce fragrance. Just speculation on my part. Though pseudopollen is a common attractant in orchids (like in some Cymbidiums, Laelias, Coelogynes, and Pleiones) , it usually is closer to the middle of the lip the base. Dennis One Additional thing on a totally different subject. I recently saw a cute Paph labeled as P. vejuarutianum. it looks to me like a natural (or primary) hybrid with charlesworthii in it. Googling it was worthless. Anyone know anything about this plant? **Looking for simple solutions to your real-life financial challenges? Check out WalletPop for the latest news and information, tips and calculators. (http://www.walletpop.com/?NCID=emlcntuswall0001) ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) orchids@orchidguide.com http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
Re: [OGD] Orchid names/evolution
In a message dated 8/16/08 3:02:49 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, Robert Riefer writes: "The confusion, aggravation, and cost of modern day nomenclature is the result of being based upon an outdated, early 19th century hypothesis with an admitted probability of 10 to the negative 37th power or 1/10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 chance of occurence. Such an archane and absurd idea would have been laid to rest in museums and repeats of "Antiques Roadshow" if it were not the state sponsored religion in the United States: taught in the public school system as early as kindergarten. Its name is The Theory of Evolution." With all due respect, your statement on the absurd probability of species diversity being the result of evolution is based on a misunderstanding of both probabilities, and biological processes. Reactions and changes within biological (and inorganic chemical)systems are not random in any sense, nor driven by probability. And these biological systems are not closed systems, and so are not simply driven by the laws of thermodynamics as the proponents of superstition like to believe. Were the theory so "arcane and absurd", it would not have the power to make the predictions and drive the research that it has in so many of the sub fields of biological science. Clearly more absurd and arcane are the conjectures of "special creation" (especially the "young earth" version), and "intelligent design". They have neither the power to make experimentally verifiable predictions, not to explain complex observations. Acceptance of both in fact requires basic changes in the rules of science, and a negation of naturalism. Both assume that the current lack of ability to explain certain phenomena is the result, not of current lack of knowledge or evidence, but the result of the phenomena being beyond human understanding (the result of supernatural intervention). Both also require the rejection of much physics and geology and the acceptance of scenarios with no factual base (field observation or experimental results). At base both creationism and intelligent design also require one to accept the scriptures of three specific religions (Christianity, Judaism, Islam) as "true", and the scriptures of all others as necessarily "false". Though, to be honest, "intelligent design" also allows one to believe that god-like space aliens are responsible for species diversity, but asks for no empirical proof. What can be said about the confusion of modern day nomenclature is that it is in serious flux as a result of new experimental tools whose efficacy and proper use is still being figured out. And that perhaps the basic concepts of Genus, Species and Family need to be examined, as well as the criteria for defining them in plants. The Theory of Evolution is about as strong as a theory can get, and those who deny it would probably also go for the theory of spontaneous generation so popular back in the 16th century, and the theory of the earth-centric universe, so clearly explained and supported by Genesis! **Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget? Read reviews on AOL Autos. (http://autos.aol.com/cars-Volkswagen-Jetta-2009/expert-review?ncid=aolaut000307 ) ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) orchids@orchidguide.com http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
Re: [OGD] Name Changes
Marc Writes: "A) It is difficult to imagine combining a genus of large purple/pink flowered plants into a genus of small red/orange flowered plants? would it have been more "acceptable" to move Sopronitis into Laelia and have Laelia coccinea and Laelia cernua? B)the name changes have been so frequent causing too much confusion about what you knew previously? (including the new and confusing hybrid grex names) C)the new classification makes it impossible to understand how to tell the genera apart? D) How scientists use DNA analysis to help track the relationships between plants to help determine the classification of groups of related species? I find it interesting that people have "pitchforks and torches" out for taxonomists over the Cattleya alliance but all the changes with Masdevallia, Dendrobium, the Oncidinae,and the Huntleya alliance went by with little public comment. I would love to hear peoples replies and comments about these questions on or off list. Interpretation of scientific data and science writing for mass media is something that I do on a regular basis so this is something that is relevant to what I do. I am also in the process of preparing a presentation for our judging center here in the north east about how to understand and interpret the recent taxonomic revisions." And these are good and important questions. He touches on the long history of using visual distinctions to tell genera and subgenera apart, and how that now seems too often at odds with taxonomic changes based on DNA analysis. Most can, after seeing a few examples, easily tell a Cattleya from a Laelia from a Sophronitis. They can even distinguish the various subgenera. In a pinch they can use the difference in the number of pollinia to tell the genera apart. For generations these gross visual distinctions were enough. And they seemed to say something about the way in which these plants were related evolutionarily (which I always thought was at the base of taxonomy). Now all of a sudden, Cattleya, Laelia, and Sophronitis are being lumped and split and lumped in quick succession and in various ways. The new taxonomic tools that were supposed to elucidate relationships seem to be doing no such thing, just creating new opinions. He also brings up the fact that few of us understand how DNA taxonomy is done. Obviously entire genomes are not compared, but specific genes (or groups of genes?). These genes seem to vary with the genera studied and with different researchers. And the results these studies produce are often at odds with what seems intuitive. There is a great example of this in the Bromeliad family. From the time that the genera Tillandsia and Vriesea were erected, one major difference between the two was the presence or absence of "nectar scales" at the base of the petals. It was universal, and bolstered what seemed visually obvious on a gross level. With the advent of molecular taxonomy, suddenly it was no longer important. Plants which previously had been considered as examples of convergent evolution in different genera were suddenly seen as in the same genus despite floral differences (and a real hesitance to interbreed). He does not mention the suspicion many people have of the conflict between lumpers and splitters. In Orchidacaea you have a huge family, with more species than any other plant family, and a huge number of genera. Why shouldn't there be a number of huge genera within it? That some taxonomists are made nervous by huge genera, and others by tiny ones does little to inspire confidence in taxonomy in general. There has been a great deal of grumbling in my neck of the woods over the changes in Masdevallia and Pleurothallis, probably because they are so common in collections here. And almost no one uses the new names here: hoping, I think, that if they are ignored, they will go away. I would look forward to seeing an article from Marc dealing with these issues, and if he takes it "on the road", a lecture/slide presentation. I think it would serve hobbyists well to have a greater understanding of the "advances" in modern taxonomy and the changes they seem to be inspiring. We could then make a more educated choice about when to change labels, and learn new names. Dennis **Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget? Read reviews on AOL Autos. (http://autos.aol.com/cars-BMW-128-2008/expert-review?ncid=aolaut000517 ) ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) orchids@orchidguide.com http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
Re: [OGD] Orchid Society of California
"Orchid Society of California - Meets... third Mondays monthly." The Orchid Society of California is the local society of Oakland, CA. It is so named because it was the first Orchid Society to be formed in California (and west of the Mississippi as well). Apparently it was the originator of the Orchid Digest as well (please correct me if I am wrong on that). Though smaller than its neighbor, the San Francisco Orchid Society it is similar in the high percentage of species growers, and the quality of show tables each month. Programs are more frequently geared towards beginner growers than at the SFOS. This month is the annual "Ice Cream Social" and plant auction. Dennis **Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget? Read reviews on AOL Autos. (http://autos.aol.com/cars-BMW-128-2008/expert-review?ncid=aolaut000517 ) ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) orchids@orchidguide.com http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
Re: [OGD] urinal / Sorensen
"gastou US$ 10 mil por uma pe?a de porcelana esculpida" Our recent Pacific Orchid Exposition in San Francisco (as part of an increasing presentation of the work of artists inspired by orchids) featured 8 of Clark Sorensen's urinals. They do in fact cost up to $10,000, are fully functional, and manage to be both amusing and beautiful (some fanciful, some with a surprisingly high level of botanical accuracy). Obviously spending that much on a bathroom fixture is frivolous (decadent really). But if you've got it, and are going to spend it, what better way than on a beautifully made fixture, produced by a really nice guy. Dennis ** Create a Home Theater Like the Pros. Watch the video on AOL Home. (http://home.aol.com/diy/home-improvement-eric-stromer?video=15?ncid=aolhom000301) ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) orchids@orchidguide.com http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
Re: [OGD] Copper and Bromeliads
In a message dated 3/25/08 3:00:33 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Multicrop makes Kocide Blue. There is also a Blue Xtra. I'm not a big fan > of > Kocide so I've never bothered to find out what the difference is. Yates > Fungus Fighter Copper Fungicide is also Copper Hydroxide. These should be > available on shelf at your local garden centre. > Andrew > If you plan on using copper products and have Tillandsias, Racineas or other Bromeliads in your collection, be aware that all epiphytic bromeliads are easily damaged or killed by copper products. Dennis ** Create a Home Theater Like the Pros. Watch the video on AOL Home. (http://home.aol.com/diy/home-improvement-eric-stromer?video=15?ncid=aolhom000301) ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) orchids@orchidguide.com http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
Re: [OGD] Masdevallia veitchiana
In a message dated 3/1/08 3:04:48 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > "Masdevallia veitchiana should be moist at all times and > prefers a balanced (20-20-20) fertilizer every two weeks at one-half > strength [too strong !]." Viateur comments that the recommended fertilizer concentration and frequency for M.veitchiana is too strong, but that is generally the way it is grown in these parts. They rapidly grow into huge everblooming specimens here, and plants in 10 and 12 inch pots with many flowers at a time are not uncommon in gardens; even among growers who have no other orchids but Cymbidiums. The text for the article was provided to the SF Chronicle by Tom Perlite, arguably one of the best Masdevallia growers and hybridizers around. Dennis Westler ** Ideas to please picky eaters. Watch video on AOL Living. (http://living.aol.com/video/how-to-please-your-picky-eater/rachel-campos-duffy/ 2050827?NCID=aolcmp0030002598) ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) orchids@orchidguide.com http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
Re: [OGD] Global cooling
In a message dated 1/5/08 3:00:29 AM Pacific Standard Time, Mr. Baxter writes: > "Look out all you environmentalist wackos, the Russians have just > announced a study that says the global warming is over and cooling is > about to begin. Run for the hills and light your bonfires! Remember > cold kills far more people every year than heat." > The wackos are those that ignore an overwhelming number of studies that have been piling up over the last 35 years, as well as a huge amount of anecdotal evidence (dates of first and last frost, dates of bird migrations, observed ranges of insects and plants and so on). They instead grasp at straws, like the few maverick papers that appear, to support their views (based on either vested interests, politics, or misunderstanding of science). The science involved in climate change makes it quite clear why Russia and the other northern regions will experience colder temperatures as the climate changes. This has to do with changes in ocean salinity and currents. Observations have been recently made that corroborate this. As the orchids we love move up the mountainsides to escape climate change and then finally disappear (more than they already are from habitat destruction) people like you will suddenly be scratching their heads and realizing just who the wackos are. ** Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape. http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exercise?NCID=aolcmp0030002489 ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) orchids@orchidguide.com http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
Re: [OGD] "Nature's Call"
For those of you who happen to be in the area (or plan to come) Clark Sorensen will be displaying several of his orchid urinals at this year's Pacific Orchid Exposition (Fort Mason Center, San Francisco Feb 29-March 2, 2008). The things are really quite interesting in person. Amusing, and with a very high level of botanical accuracy for functional bathroom fixtures! If we can manage it, a few of them will function as fountains. They will be in the main entrance area so hopefully no one will attempt to use them! Dennis Westler ** See AOL's top rated recipes (http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NCID=aoltop000304) ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) orchids@orchidguide.com http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
Re: [OGD] Lichen on mounted plants
In a message dated 10/14/2007 3:02:21 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, Nancy writes: "but I still have something that appears to be lichen creeping over a lot of the wood. Any suggestions on an attack for this? I can scrape off the ruffled edges, but the flat parts are just too smooth, and I'd like to kill off whatever spores are causing this growth. Not unattractive, but still... Regards - Nancy" Nancy: I grow my plants outdoors in coastal California (and this may not translate to the deep South), and have had lichen growing on a number of the Orchids and Bromeliads I keep mounted on Cork. Over the years I have found that the conditions favoring lichen growth also seem to favor the Orchids and Bromeliads. There seems to be no conflict between the two as there would be with algae, fungus, some mosses, and liverworts. If what you have is liverworts (they look sort of like lichen, but are darker green and slimy), than excessive humidity and moisture is certainly a problem. Other than drying things out more and reducing fertilizer application I am not sure how you would control them. There are chemicals, but they do not seem to be indicated for use on orchids. Dennis ** See what's new at http://www.aol.com ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) orchids@orchidguide.com http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
[OGD] e-mail autoresponse, and question on Isochilus aurantiacus
In a message dated 9/8/2007 3:02:08 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: "cant everyone on the list send him an e/m perhaps he might not do it i future???" If you are referring to e-mail auto responses, people use them with work related or home business related addresses, and they are an important way for others to know why their mail is not responded to in a timely fashion (I thought everyone knew this). If everyone on the sent him an e-mail everyone on the list would simply get the auto response, and he's probably get pissed. It's not like it is any sort of hassle to folks who get this digest to simply scroll past these out-of-office messages. On an orchid topic: I have Isochilus aurantiacus in a slatted basket where it has happily been since 2001. I am sure it will need repotting and dividing soon, though it shows no sign of decline (and I don't think I should wait till it does). As it has thin leaves, really thin stems, not terribly succulent roots and no discernable dormancy, I worry about desiccation after repotting. Does anyone have experience with this plant and any ideas when the best time to repot/divide would be? Thanks, Dennis ** See what's new at http://www.aol.com ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) orchids@orchidguide.com http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
Re: [OGD] Boisduval scale
In a message dated 5/23/07 3:02:03 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > "I am wondering what you all do about boisduval scale." I have had acceptable results (I say acceptable because the scale always reappeared within a year of application, implying they were not entirely eradicated) with three methods in a 16' x 25' intermediate greenhouse I was taking care of for several years. The collection was mostly Cattleyas, Dendrobiums (Formosae and Latouria types, with some other sections thrown in), Phrags, Oncidiums, and some misc. genera. The greenhouse was overcrowded (as so many hobby greenhouses are). And despite instruction, the owners insisted on watering way too frequently. I believe these two things contributed to the spread of the scale (especially on the Cattleyas). On one occasion I used Orthene aerosol total release cans. This really needs to be done late in the day when the vents have closed or the exhaust fan shut off (but with circulation fans going). There was no damage to foliage or flowers. I have also used Orthene wettable powder to which a small amount of dish detergent was added. The advantage here is that spray can be directed specifically to the undersides of the leaves and the rhizome where populations of the scale are heaviest. The disadvantage is that plants should be removed from the greenhouse (you really don't want to apply Orthene in an enclosed environment even with a respirator and protective garments). Here as well there was no damage to plants or flowers. Finally I have used light horticultural oil. This needed really thorough application, and had to be done three times (as opposed to twice with Orthene). It also damaged flowers and the foliage on some plants (a few Cattleyas, but a significant number of Dendrobiums). All three methods seemed to provide control. But as mentioned above, infestation reappeared within a year. I think that once you have had Boisduval scale on your collection, a complete spraying of the greenhouse should be done twice a year, whether you see the pests or not. Dennis ** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) orchids@orchidguide.com http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
[OGD] Masedvallia "Dwarf Pink"
Does anyone have any information about the taxonomic standing of the Masdevallia coccinea grown with the name of "Dwarf Pink"? Although it looks superficially like a small scale coccinea, there are small differences, most notably the marked color difference in the dorsal sepal, and the presence of dark lines on the sepals towards the center of the flower. Has this plant been noted in the wild, or has it originated in cultivation? Simply curious, Dennis Westler ** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) orchids@orchidguide.com http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
[OGD] Masdevallia "Dwarf Pink"
** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) orchids@orchidguide.com http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
Re: [OGD] Orchids Digest, Vol 9, Issue 58
> "Warning: mice seem to love Australian terrestrial tubers." > > My experience has been that Squirrels and Jays (if we may extrapolate from > Pterostylis to other Australian species) will also dig up and eat tubers. All > three go after the Disas and Stenoglottis (which aren't Australian, but are > still nice and juicy) You really have to keep them in hardware cloth cages if > they are outside! Dennis ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) orchids@orchidguide.com http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
Re: [OGD] Article from Iris
In a message dated 2/7/07 10:04:37 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Thank God the AOS never sank to the level of publishing the referenced > article. It was appropriate for The Orchid Review which has become a > distinctly > second-rate rag. It is so typical of this woman who has no worthwhile orchid > knowledge and yet wishes to be paid for her efforts. Like her postings > seeking > cheap accomodations in Miami for the WOC next January, it speaks volumes > about the writer! > Why is it that Mr. Easton, who by his own admission is possessed of more worthwhile orchid knowledge than a significant percentage of the people here, never posts any? He is well known for his hybrids and cultural prowess, and I regret that I was unable to hear him speak on Cymbidiums when he was in my area (SF Bay Area), as I have heard he is a great speaker. However, that he never posts other than to denigrate others (or occasionally flame those who denigrate him or defend those he dislikes) is troubling. I recognize that many people on this forum have more orchid knowledge than I, and thus am more likely to lurk or ask questions than to post advice. Perhaps Mr. Easton should recognize that his knowledge is of much more value here than his vitriol, and post accordingly. I am sure that I am not the only one on this forum that grows weary of the personal attacks and rarely constructive criticism. Certainly Mr. Easton, it is often amusing to read your posts, but rest assured we laugh at you not with you. Dennis Westler ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) orchids@orchidguide.com http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
Re: [OGD] Primitive Pelorics
In a message dated 10/4/06 2:43:59 PM Pacific Daylight Time, Iris writes: "Sometimes you get a peloric mutation, which is actually a reversion to a more primitive flower." Although peloric forms are often referred to as "more primitive" because the flower appears more radially symmetrical (as a Tulip or Tradescantia), I don't really buy it. Most likely a "primitive" orchid flower would still be zygomorphic, like an Amaryllis or Hemerocallis; or like Thelymetras which have a lip barely distinct from the other two petals. Most orchids considered "primitive" for various reasons (lack of pseudobulbs or leaf succulence, plicate leaves arranged radially around a stem, poorly consolidated pollen, lack of an anther cap, and so on) already show marked lip specialization even if they lack other features of "advanced" orchid flowers. I prefer to think of peloric flowers as monstrous forms (though not necessarily monstrosities) where a mutation has made the remaining two petals more (sometimes much more) lip like. Due to a lack of fossil orchids we will never know what the ancestral flowers looked like, but I'd be willing to bet they looked more like a Thelymetra or Spiranthes than like a peloric Phal. Happy Succot and Simchat Torah! Dennis ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) orchids@orchidguide.com http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
Re: [OGD] Invasive non-natives
In a message dated 8/30/06 3:03:00 AM Pacific Daylight Time, Andy Easton writes:
"At the recent ASHS Summer meetings all the talk was about that the US is looking to follow the lead of two stupid countries, Australia and New Zealand, who currently operate a most restrictive control system for the importation of non-indigenous species. All the usual garbage is spouted about making sure they don't become invasive (most of us would love orchids to become invasive)"
Living in California, the danger of invasive nonnative plants is very obvious, and cannot be downplayed. The list of plants which are currently displacing native plants, reducing habitat and food for native animals and degrading agricultural land is huge. Eucalyptus species, Acacia species, Pampas Grass, Scotch Broom, Spanish Broom, Vinca Major, Vinca Minor, Algerian Ivy, Himalayan Blackberries, Senecio ("German Ivy"), Centranthus ruber, Star Thistle, are just a few in California. European Bittersweet, and Kudzu are a couple I know of in the East, but I am sure the list is much longer.
The notion that Orchids could become invasive or noxious weeds seems far fetched, but Zeuxine strateumatica has apparently established itself in Florida, and Epipactis helleborine has managed to spread across the entire country. The latter can be found in a surprising range of conditions in California; garden beds, lawns, roadside ditches, woodlands, dry slopes, and scrublands. The danger of nonnative orchids doing the same widespread damage as Eucalyptus or Pampas Grass is probably slight. But the possibility of them displacing native orchid species, and driving them towards extinction (given the other pressures on them) is worth considering. I have seen huge drifts of E. helleborine in a roadside ditch in one location, and given the number of seed pods they produce, it is worrisome. I like Epipactis h., but would rather see our native Epipactis gigantea, and Calyso bulbosa thrive, both in habitats that E. helleborine enjoys.
Past experience with invasive nonnative plants and animals shows we need to be more careful in the future. I have no doubt any new restrictions on plant importation will be a pain in the as for us all, but they are not necessarily "garbage".
___
the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD)
orchids@orchidguide.com
http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
Re: [OGD] Gabriel Stowe's judging notion.
In a message dated 8/19/06 3:03:11 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: While there are undoubtedly people who are in excellent shape physically and mentally at 70, this is not always the rule. Clearing judges out at 70 offers a way of removing those who are clearly incapable by this age without the acrimony involved in doing this piecemeal, or alternatively just leaving them there to clog up the system. It also stimulates the development of a generation of upcoming judges. Gabe S. It is the height of idiocy for business to slough off older employees who have experience and wisdom just because younger ones are cheaper as is commonly done these days. It is even more idiotic for volunteer groups to do the same, for equally shallow reasons. The benefits of long experience are in judging (as I said previously) undeniable. And the neophyte is never as good as the expert, though he or she may be very enthusiastic. Your suggestion that judges (all judges) be removed at 70 because some may perhaps be incapable at that age displays the very lack of wisdom that the inexperienced commonly display. Perhaps mental acuity and physical health are gone by that age in the UK, but certainly not in a large part of the rest of the developed world. Never mind that becoming a judge requires a number of years and a great investment of time during those years. Never mind that so many people these days are quite sound of mind and body at 70 and beyond. It can take up to 8 years to become an AOS judge, and many do not start until they approach retirement age. So lets say I were to enter the system at 55, and become certified at 63. Why even bother if I only get to judge for 7 years? One cannot stimulate the development of a generation of upcoming judges, if those who have the most to offer to them are tossed off like so much wilted produce. It is in fact the promulgation of silly ideas, not proper respect for experience, that "clogs up the system." It may be of some value for judges to be "reevaluated" by their peers at regular intervals, but to have firm (and rather low) upper age limit is, to be blunt, stupid. Dennis Westler ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) orchids@orchidguide.com http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
Re: [OGD] Ageism and Judges
In a message dated 8/12/06 1:28:56 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Age can become a problem. All judges should be retired off at 70. By this time, sight, hearing and general well being are starting to decline, and many old people start turning inwards, worrying too much about their disintegrating bodies and minds, so not being in a position to view flowers, or anything, objectively any more. Whereas the inability to discern the difference between red and green (and see them as muddy browns) or the inability to discern flower structure properly without glasses constitute obvious problems in judging orchid flowers, advanced age may or may not. To say that judges need to be "retired off" by 70 is ludicrous. People age differently in terms of both their physical and mental capabilities. I have known people in their 40's who will clearly never have the ability to be judges despite being good growers, and people in their 80's who continued to judge, and did it well, up until weeks or days of their passing. Older people are not necessarily "turning inwards" any more than teenagers are necessarily self absorbed. Often the dedication necessary to be a judge gives older people a motivation and interest that keeps them going. It maintains their health and enthusiasm, and they remain an asset to the judging community. Plus the more one sees and judges, the better equipped one is likely to be to judge properly. I go bicycling and hiking with guys 20-25 years my senior and they constantly give lie to the notion that anyone over 70 is "decrepit." It is time to retire outmoded notions about old people and aging. Dennis Westler ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) orchids@orchidguide.com http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
Re: [OGD] are bromeliads orchidaceous?
In a message dated 7/7/06 8:06:13 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: This is my first post and I have a question to the taxanomists on the list or anybody who can help! My question is, are bromeliads orchidaceous plants? I know bromeliads are in the family of Bromeliaceae and orchids are in the order of Orchidaceae but the word "orchidaceous" describes epiphytic plants, so does that mean all epiphytic plants are orchidaceous, including bromeliads. Thanks, Steve Steve: Although bromeliads are often found growing with orchids in the new world subtropical and tropical forests, they are not closely related at all (beyond the fact that both are monocots). They used to be considered as allied to the Commelinaceae (the group that contains the Tradescantias, or Wandering Jews). Recently however DNA evidence has suggested (oddly, I think) that they are closer to the Poaceae, the grass family. I have also seen them segregated into a small group with the Typhaceae (cattails) and Anagozanthaceae (kangaroo paws), which is even odder. They certainly enjoy the same conditions as orchids, and work well aesthetically combined in horticultural displays. Though some are faster growers and will overwhelm orchids. The word "orchidaceous" is used correctly to refer to plants in the orchid family whether they are epiphytic or not. It do not believe it refers to the epiphytic habit. Dennis ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) orchids@orchidguide.com http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
Re: [OGD] Off topic = Off list
In a message dated 4/20/06 3:01:28 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: "ENOUGH!! What is it with you people?! This list is about orchids predominately. Take your off-topic posts elsewhere. There's nothing stopping you from discussing this with one another privately, but it's like you just have a need to grandstand, to be seen, and then the next poster chimes in prolonging the off-topic posts. What part of "Go OFF-list" don't you guys understand It's really very simple. Sorry to be so blunt: Let's stick to orchids and related topics. Please? Totally Arrghh!" Unless I am somehow being automatically spared off topic posts, there hasn't been one on the digest since the 12th of the month. And the appropriateness of that post is debatable. The validity of a particular name, as a consequence of date of publication is on topic. A very public bitch fight may not be, but a significant number of people find them amusing nonetheless. And as national and international politics has an undeniable affect on habitat preservation, global climate change, restrictions on international trade and so on; even political discussion can be seen as an orchid related topic. But on to other things I just crossed two of my nice large flowered clones of Pleione formosana, as well as formosana x confusa (which I believe remakes Shantung). Can any sort of germination be expected if seeds are sown on moss (as with Spiranthes cernua which comes up like a weed)? If they really need to be flasked, how long till the pods can be harvested? Thanks, Dennis ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) orchids@orchidguide.com http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
Re: [OGD] Cattleya Leaves
"I have several catts and mini-catts with leaves that turn black and fall off. What causes this? I don't see evidence of insects. Sometimes the black patch starts with spots throughout the leaf and sometimes it is a gradually-spreading patch. I also have some catts with leaves that are almost rose-coloured. They used to be green. I know this can be a sign of too much light, but they are just under fluorescents and not many of those. I noticed today that there was an insect strip close by so I have removed it. It was quite old and not likely very potent so I don't know if that's the cause. Any ideas would be appreciated. Gail Friesen" Dear Gail: The spreading black patches may well be a fungus. But given the "rose color" on other plants, I think you have a water quality problem. Often people growing under lights do not apply enough water with each watering to prevent salts from accumulating in the potting mix. A decomposing potting mix would exacerbate this. You might have an excess of zinc or magnesium salts in your water (due to a change in the municipal water source, or a shift to well water), or perhaps you have added a softener to your water system and sodium is now building up in the pots. Oddly, the tolerance of different species/hybrids to water quality varies, so different plants would show different damage. Hope this helps, Dennis ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) orchids@orchidguide.com http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
Re: [OGD] Dry rest for Cymbidiums
Oliver Sparrow Writes: However, virtually all of the large flowered species and their progeny are monsoonal, which means that they need a dry rest in Winter. This is usually accompanied by very bright sun in the wild, and with temperatures which may be low or high, depending on their habitat. As a rule, they will not flower unless given such a rest - typically, in the Northern hemisphere, receiving no water whatsoever between October and March. Many, such as C. sinense, iridioides and traceanum flower whilst dry, as they do in the wild. If they are kept warm and wet, they will grow prolifically, but seldom flower. In coastal California, Where hybrid, and many species Cymbidiums flower spectacularly, Cymbidiums are never given a dry rest (except perhaps for the warmer growing Australian species and some of their hybrids). Our rainy season is essentially October-March. One can see many Cyms grown as garden plants or container plants blooming their fool heads off in the pouring rain. Cym. tracyanum blooms very readily here, and is an early bloomer, typically in bloom by mid November. They certainly prefer less water as the temperatures get cooler, but they really do not need a dry rest, and the hybrids seem to resent it (though I have found that a couple of dry months in the early fall encourages spikes in C. devonianum). It seems to most California growers that the large difference between day and night temperature, and the cool to cold nights in the late summer and early fall (typically 15-20 degree f difference, with night temperatures around 55) is what induces flowering. Dennis ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) orchids@orchidguide.com http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
[OGD] Peter's opinion of Phrags.
In a message dated 1/6/06 3:00:45 AM Pacific Standard Time, Orchids-Peter O'byrne writes: but the fact is that most Phragmipedium species are dreadful houseplants. You've seen the photos so you know what I mean ... fans of large, ungainly leathery leaves sprouting from a fly-infested pot of sodden peaty compost. The flower spikes are large and ungainly, and flop all over the place unless staked. Flower colours are boring (unless you like muddy greens, browns and yellows) and the best adjective that can be applied to the flower shape is "bizarre". The principle exceptions are P. schlimii (white, dirty pink and yellow) and P. besseae, which can be a beautiful clear bright cinnabar red, but has the uncooperative habit of rapidly crawling out of it's container. The real question is why anyone bothers growing them the answer can only be for reasons of status. They're ***SLIPPER ORCHIDS***, which means high scores on the brownie-point scale, plus the knowledge that you've got something that most other orchid freaks don't have. They're CITES Appendix-A plants, so by buying them you're striking a blow for individual personal freedom against the dictatorship of tyrannical commie-pinko bureaucracy. Then there is the added attraction that if you buy and kill enough of them, you'll help eradicate all the wild populations, which means that your surviving plants will the only ones left, so you can proudly boast about how you're assisting orchid-conservation. Really, the same could be said of Bulbophyllums, at least in terms of flower size and coloration. The current interest in Phrags is based on the hybrids that have been produced using Phrag besseae. They are relatively large flowered, brightly colored, and vigorous. Properly grown, their foliage is no less attractive than any number of houseplants, and the pots are not fly infested. I successfully grew and bloomed P. besseae, P. Sedenii, and P. pearcei as houseplants for a number of years until they became too large for my windowsills (actually, with the besseae I got tired of dealing with the climbing habit). In proper light they do not need to be staked. While some people may purchase them because of their protected status, and out of a misguided desire to have jungle collected plants, they are certainly the minority, and Peter's assumption that it is a major driving force for slipper lovers is rather bizarre. Most slipper growers love them for their appearance, and often for their unique differences from the rest of the family (why I also grow Pterostylis). Most of us are happy to wait for legal seedlings with the proper papers. The use of such broad generalizations to characterize a varied group of people, no matter who that group is, is rather unseemly and reflects poorly on the person making the generalization. Were such generalizations made about particular races or religions, they would not be tolerated. Just because the charm of particular plants is not apparent to you is no reason to entertain paranoid fantasies about all those see that charm. People who bring plants in for AOS judging without the proper papers will hopefully see them refused or confiscated, though some judges will undoubtedly turn a blind eye. Dennis ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) orchids@orchidguide.com http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
Re: [OGD] "extrafloral nectar"
In a message dated 12/16/05 3:02:03 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On the question of sugary exudates external to the orchid flower, I have always assumed they function to attract ants to the orchid plant and/or flower. The ants, in turn, would then protect the orchid from herbivorous insects. (I believe a similar situation can be found in the peony.) Considering the intimate relationships found between ants and other tropical plants, this would be a natural extension. Although guttation is associated with reducing fluid pressure and does contain water and minerals, I find it difficult to believe that orchids are in a position to "fritter away" excess sugar. Close examination of certain orchids (Cymbidiums come to mind) will reveal glands at the base of flowers and sometimes on other parts of the plants. These are the locations of the thick sweet substance to which reference has been made in previous postings. This is not guttation as several have suggested, but clearly an extrafloral attractant produced at specific locations. I believe (but have no empirical evidence or paper to cite), that in habitat this would encourage ants to protect the inflorescence from predation. Dennis Westler ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) orchids@orchidguide.com http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
Re: [OGD] "Cryptic conditions",shade tolerant haworthias
Charles Asks: If someone knows what cryptic conditions are, or the conditions that shade-tolerant haworthias prefer, that would be an even bigger bonus. The reference to "cryptic denizens" means plants that are hard to see in their habitat due to pattern, color, or positioning of leaves close to the ground. Lithops are a good example of cryptic plants. My friends who grow the shade tolerant Haworthias give them in bright to moderate shade. They grow some of them as winter growers; watering them more often in the winter than in the summer. They all get quite dry between watering when dormant, and are watered when still barely moist while active. But they are never watered frequently at any point in the year. Hope this helps. Dennis ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) orchids@orchidguide.com http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
[OGD] Re: Dendrobium falcorostrum
In a message dated 6/16/05 10:55:12 PM Pacific Daylight Time, Michael Timmons writes: I'm considering adding Dendrobium falcorostrum to my orchid collection, and I'd like to see if anyone has experience with this species. I've read that it prefers cool conditions in order to thrive, which might be a problem for me since I live in the Midwestern portion of the US, where our days are usually very warm and humid. My other Australian Dendrobiums (kingianum, pedunculatum, curvicaule and x delicatum) spend the summers outdoors here, get lots of sunlight and water, and do well for me, but I'm not sure how adaptable falcorostrum would be under the same conditions, and would appreciate hearing from anyone who has experience with it--especially if you grow it outside of its ideal environment. Thank you. Mike: I grow Dend. falcorostrum outdoors in the Oakland Hills (east of San Francisco). While certainly not as hot as the Midwestern states in the summer, we are certainly warmer than San Francisco, and my Australian Dendrobiums do fine (they bake in the afternoon sun and are kept warm at night by the brick paving they sit on). I suspect that as long as you provide cool, bright and dry conditions in the winter your plant will do fine. I water mine very infrequently in winter, allowing the canes to remain somewhat shriveled for months. I only begin watering enough to plump it up when the flower buds are pretty well developed. My D. x delicatum and a bunch of other hybrids don't seem to need quite as much winter dryness as the falcorostrum to bloom well. Dennis ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) orchids@orchidguide.com http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
[OGD] Re: commercial spam
In a message dated 6/14/05 3:01:24 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Regarding Mr Pond trying to Flog his Phrags, how come we're getting commercial spam printed in full on this digest ? (Check his header). Peter O'Byrne in Singapore In the spirit of charity, I will assume that Mr. Stephenson sent out the list to all the names in his address book and simply forgot to delete the OGD. I agree strongly with Peter that it is inappropriate for this digest to be used for commercial advertising, and hope Mr. Stephenson will see these objections and be more careful in the future (as the list is unfiltered). As to flogging, certainly the besseae hybrids do not have the substance or texture to withstand much flogging and remain saleable! Besides, if they misbehave enough to deserve flogging, who would want to own them? Dennis ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) orchids@orchidguide.com http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
[OGD] Re: Orchids Digest, Vol 7, Issue 283
Oliver Sparrow writes: "Here is a picture of an orchid found growing at 1500m in Pampa Hermosa, near Satipo in Perú. http://www.trekperu.org/orchid.jpg I would dearly like to know what it is - even the genus! The flowers are as illustrated, around 12 cm across. The plant stands around 3-5m tall, winding through scrub with flexible 2-3 cm diametre stems. The leaves are extremely odd for an orchid. There is no petiole, and the leaf entirely encloses the stem, standing 2-3 cm proud on one side and 25 cm on the other. Leaves are extremely fleshy and rigid - approaching an aloe, almost - and tapering to a sharp point in a near straight line, much as an aloe does. I could not get to see the roots. The area is Sobralia territory but I wonder if this is not a Vanilla? Or what?" The plant is certainly a Sobralia, as Oliver suggests. It is most definitely not Sobralia macrantha though. Too tall, wrong locale, and macrantha is one of the Sobralias that has a greatly reduced inflorescence, not the long racemes shown in the photo. Eric Christenson knows this genus well, perhaps he will comment. Dennis ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) orchids@orchidguide.com http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
[OGD] Re: Laelia roots
K. Barrett writes: So, no input on whether Laelias root before bloom or after bloom? Just today I was looking at new roots on a young (not big enough to bloom yet) Laelia tenebrosa (if its still considered a Laelia, and not a Cattleya), appearing as the new growth is about 1/3 mature. And new roots on a Laelia speciosa with a very young growth. Seems like all the Mexican Laelias, which according to some are the only true Laelias, root on the new growths, long before the flowers appear. Laelia sincorana and L. jongheana (which might be Sophronitis at this point) on the other hand seem to root after bloom, at least for me. Don't take the lack of response personally. My experience has been that sometimes you have to ask a question twice before you get any response. Dennis ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) orchids@orchidguide.com http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
[OGD] Re: "AOS approved" taxonomists
"the first AOS approved taxonomic authority from Colombia. Just another wonderful AOS service for orchid growers worldwide, through the generosity of the taxonomic authorities who share their time and the AOS which coordinates their efforts." In what way does AOS "approval" confer any additional credibility on a taxonomist (what exactly is an AOS approved taxonomist)? Does the AOS give grants for taxonomic research? The wording "through the generosity of the taxonomic authorities" implies that they do not. Certainly the AOS is not recognized as an organization qualified to review the merits of taxonomic research (as say the Missouri Botanic Gardens would be), especially now that Lindleyana has become a sporadic addendum to "Orchids". Don't get me wrong; I am an AOS member, and understand the credibility that the AOS gives to the show I chair through their sanction and the AOS trophy. I also understand and appreciate AOS judging (amused though I am by the inability of the "old guard" judges here to wrap their tongues around Latin names or understand the merit of certain plants). I simply would like to know what such approval means. ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) orchids@orchidguide.com http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
[OGD] Pollinator specificity
["Pollinator specificity to a flower is akin to parasite specificity to a host. Although there is a naturally selective trend toward greater specificity, in the long term obligate relationships fail."] Some idle speculation on my part (with no claim to any truth; just a desire to continue discussion): While pollinator specificity does seem to cause vulnerability in species that have evolved it to a high degree; existing environmental conditions drive natural selection. So should a pollinator become extinct, it is only then that the vulnerability becomes an issue. Evolution is driven by specific pressures, not by speculation, possibility, or efficiency. Some traits are rendered valuable by the preexistence of other traits. Were consolidated pollen to have evolved in orchid ancestors for example, it may well have predisposed orchids towards some level of pollinator specificity (sort of like the chicken and the egg, which came first). That orchids may exhibit specificity in their native habitat, but require only a pollinator of a particular size when cultivated is clear (my Prosthecia vittelina generally has most of its flowers pollinated, much to my dismay; and my Epidendrum fimbriatum, Nageliella purpurea and several Pleurothallids are successfully pollinated from time to time despite the small size and complex shape of the flowers). In a stable environment, it does not seem as if there would be any reason for selection to minimize obligate relationships. Were this so, how would strategies such as pseudocopulation have evolved? Wouldn't all Angraecums have the shortest possible spurs, rather than long ones? [' "Hyperspecialisation" is an adaptive phenomenon that is probably being observed within a narrow window of ecological/evolutionary time and is limited to only a few orchid lineages (in this case, as other examples occur throughout other groups of organisms).'] All species are observed within a narrow window of ecological/evolutionary time, and all are in some sort of flux. Individual species may well have a natural life span, given that everything else in the universe seems to, even the universe itself. ["Similarly, all of the species of a family (e.g., Orchidaceae) share a basic degree of relatedness that may or not be expressed among different groups of species. Indeed, consider the pollination syndromes, where there are trends of selection for certain kinds of pollinating capabilities: moths, bees, beetles, birds, bats, etc. I think that these would illustrate the "brand loyalty" trend that you are considering."] Some genera seem to have pollinator type as the basis for their relatedness (i.e.. Ophrys, Porroglossum, Pleione, and many others). Other genera seem to show a broad range of pollinator types (i.e.. Epidendrum, Masdevallia, Dendrobium and others). Pollinator specificity is one of the great (and endearing) aspects (or myths) of the Orchid family, and a great topic for speculation and research. Even if it turns out that most species do not exhibit any sort of fidelity, where it does exist it is pretty amazing. ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) orchids@orchidguide.com http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
[OGD] Re: Catch roots
Mark Sullivan writes (Hi Mark) "As to why catch roots exists, maybe they are landing areas for small insect eating birds. Maybe the ants cause some sort of chemical activation causing an orchid to produce catch roots and man sometimes activates this in cultivation. While the orchid may get benefits from having ants nest in them, I am sure there is also a need to keep the ants in check. Just pure speculation on my part, do not expect me to produce a study to back this up." If in fact, the roots' purpose is not to collect debris, I doubt it would be to attract predators on ants. If that were the case, selection would favor ants that do not nest in such places. Two possible alternative purposes come to mind. The first would be protection for ants' nests. These pointy upward growing roots are not pleasant to deal with, and may well discourage insectivorous birds or small mammals. Ant plants seem to derive great benefit from the ants that reside in them, from the nutrients in ant droppings, and from the protection that the ants afford the host plant. Second, much as trees and shrubs in arid but foggy environments often have narrow vertically oriented leaves that channel fog drip to the root zone, vertically oriented roots may well maximize the amount of moisture caught from passing mists. Far fetched but intriguing. Once again speculation. But let's face it, speculation is as much fun as gossip, and generally more benign. Dennis Westler ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) orchids@orchidguide.com http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
[OGD] Re: Bulbophyllum baileyi
In a message dated 3/27/05 7:07:43 AM Pacific Standard Time, Sandra Hardy writes: I'm looking for culture info on Bulbophyllum baileyi. I acquired a 3 psb bareroot division 2 1/2 yrs ago that has since grown into nearly 30 psb but it has never bloomed for me. It is mounted on treefern, in bright Cattleya light in a greenhouse &for the past few months has had sphagnum moss tucked around the base of the plant. It's watered daily in summer &at least 3x week in winter, fertilized regularly along w/the rest of my mix collection. Through a Google search I just found growing on Leucopogon laverackii and Leucopogon capensis trees of the heathlands &sandy floodplains of the tip of Cape York peninsula in Australia. Charles Baker doesn't have a culture sheet on it (my all-time favorite source of species info) and I'm at a loss I have not grown this particular species, so perhaps am speaking out of turn (If so I am sure someone will set me straight, kindly or rudely). I have induced reticent Bulbophyllums to bloom (B. odoratissimum, B. jacobsonii) by giving them a brief dry rest at the end of a flush of growth. Generally withholding water for a couple of weeks until the bulbs shrivel slightly and then resuming regular watering. These were both mounted plants that made several flushes of growth each year, but had not bloomed for several years. This is anecdotal of course, but worked for me. Dennis Westler ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) orchids@orchidguide.com http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
[OGD] Re: Stomata
In a message dated 3/13/05 7:56:46 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: "The test of stomatal opening/closing reported in the posting by Steve Topletz is, I am sorry to say, meaningless (OGD Vol. 7, Issue 115, #5). A stoma (stoma [Greek origin] is the singular term; stomata is the plural, NOT stomates) consists of two living guard cells of the leaf epidermis. They respond to certain environmental changes and change their shape which causes them to separate from each other in the midregion, thus creating a gap or hole through which water vapor and gases are exchanged between the intercellular spaces within the leaf and the external environment. The operative concept here is living cells." The current discussion is in response to my question regarding a statement made in Lance Birk's Paphiopedilum Grower's Manual several times (and I posted a thank you for the discussion that somehow never showed up). The statement is that all Orchids have "fixed stomata that cannot close". He further says that this is how Orchids are able to absorb moisture and nutrients from humid air (intuition, and two terms of college level plant physiology suggests that transpiration at the leaf surface and vapor pressure would preclude this) . Though Steve's experimental observations may not pass muster for publication in a peer reviewed journal, that he observed closed stomata strongly implies that they are in no way "fixed". One assumes several minutes must pass before general desiccation of tissues closes even "fixed stomata"; and if stomata closed as a result of trauma to adjacent tissue or introduction to an unfamiliar environment (under a cover slip with water), they can in no sense be considered "fixed". Just my two cents! Dennis ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) orchids@orchidguide.com http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
[OGD] Re: "OK. I'll bite"
Leo Writes: "C!, C2, C3, or C4 - stomata that open or close - what the heck?, Does any of this mean anything about how we actually go about growing these things? I feel like you guys are arguing about the number of Angels dancing on the head of a pin. Does any of this mean anything, or is it simply esoteric gobble-dee-gook." Stomata in plants are generally opened and closed in response to environmental conditions (most often light), and they are the main avenue for gas exchange, transpiration and evaporative cooling in plants. So, how much air circulation plants require, how much water they need, when they would appreciate the highest carbon dioxide concentrations, how prone they are to heat damage, and other things are affected by when the stomata are open or closed and the specific metabolic pathways they use. Plant behavior is also interesting in and of itself (at least to me!), and makes sense of what otherwise might seem like arbitrary cultural rules. Thanks, by the way, to all those who replied to my original question about stomata. Dennis ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) orchids@orchidguide.com http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
[OGD] Question about stomata
I recently purchased Lance Birk's new Paphiopedilum Grower's Manual. In his discussion about watering and watering technique he makes the statement that Orchids have "fixed stomata", and they remain open all the time regardless of environmental conditions. Never having heard this before, I am curious as to its veracity. Does anyone in the group have knowledge about this? I know that some orchids are CAM plants, and thought one of the reasons for practicing this kind of carbon fixing was to keep stomata closed during the day and thus control water loss. Thanks Dennis Westler ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) orchids@orchidguide.com http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
[OGD] Re: Comments on Peter's politics
There is no contribution O'Byrne can make to the world of orchids that even begins to compensate for his advocacy of the wanton slaughter of innocent people. Praising terrorists, supporting terrorism, is tantamount to being a terrorist. While Peter's politics rankle some (me included), when people are exercising restraint (as he has been doing) there is no excuse for someone else flaming them. Besides, extending your argument, by supporting the People's Republic of China, does this country become Maoist? I think it is fair to say that being immersed in a culture alien to most of us Peter has insight into the motivations of terrorists that we do not (statements bandied about in the US like "they are jealous", or "they hate our freedom" betray an incredible naivety). He also understands how American policy and American cultural arrogance fans the flames of terrorism, an idea most Americans refuse to consider. This is a forum about issues relating to Orchids, and as such he brings a lot to the table. Dennis Westler ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) orchids@orchidguide.com http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
[OGD] Re: bessae?
In a message dated 1/23/05 3:01:26 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: "I recently obtained a couple of phrag. bessae, d'allessandro and hybrids. Now one of them is flowering and the flower is totally misshapen: the petals are concave and the pouch cannot separate. I posted a picture under http://www.jeandewitte.de/orchids/bessae2.jpg. Can anybody identify what is happening?" I have seen similar flower deformities in paphs and phrags when plants experienced either drought stress or excessively cool temperatures during bud development. These same plants have bloomed properly for me when given better conditions. Dennis Westler ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) orchids@orchidguide.com http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
[OGD] Re: Creationism
"And just to add my own two cents: Evolution, if applied as a scientific theory, is applicable to orchids. However, evolution does have severe flaws just as creationism, and it would be foolish to give either greater accord than its respective limitations." Though somewhat hesitant, I must add additional fuel to the fire. Evolution, as scientific theory is backed up by empiricism, and its historically successful methods of investigation. Certainly there are flaws in current knowledge of evolution, but science is fluid, and Theories must work, so they are dynamic over time. Creationism is based on one holy book (which by the way is mine, if you have not guessed). Creationism picks and chooses among facts and hypotheses to support its tenets. As this holy book is not the only one, nor is it the one most commonly held holy in the world, must we also give credence to all the other creation myths and what they say about the origin of the species? The only thing that makes Creationism "right" at this point is that believers in the "literal" interpretation of Genesis say it is right. What makes Evolution "right" is the ability to explain observations in a way that is consistent with what we know about biology and geology, and to make predictions about things that can then be observed in the natural world. ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
[OGD] Re: Evolution
In a message dated 12/10/04 6:00:17 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: "Orchids are just one of many reasons I believe in God. The incredible intracacy and beauty is, in my opinion, not the result of chance. Evolution is not a lawit is a theory." The notion that one cannot both believe in God and accept Evolution is totally puzzling to me. I have no trouble doing both. Certainly one cannot accept a literal interpretation of Genesis as related in the Torah and also accept Evolution. But Darwin's theory says nothing about the existence of God, and not all who believe in God follow the Torah or the Gospels. Catholicism, and most branches of Judaism accept the Theory of Evolution as compatible with their theology. And the Jewish and Christian holy books are but two of many in the world! Orchids provide one of the most elegant examples of evolution: with divergence of species, convergent evolution, introgression, co-evolution of flower and pollinator, and other mechanisms of evolution clearly visible throughout the family. Many consider the Orchids to be the most evolutionarily active of plant families. Speciation does not occur by chance, but in response to selection pressure of all sorts. This pressure may or may not be random, who knows? And even if it is random, how does that diminish the wonder and amazement this world inspires in most people? The reality of evolution is well documented. The mechanisms are fairly well understood at this point. Studies of fossils, field studies, genetic analyses, and experimentation show evolution at work on all time scales. Unfortunately plants leave fewer fossils than animals, so paleobotany gives few clues about the origins of Orchids, but cladistics has helped work out the family tree. A theory in scientific usage does not have quite the same meaning as in common usage. A theory in science must both explain the observed facts and be able to make predictions. Opinion and belief have no part in it. In common usage it seems to mean the same as a hypothesis does in scientific usage. Theories are subject to revision as new information is found, they are not set in stone. As scientific theories go, evolution is holding up quite well; it has lasted better than Einsteinian Relativity has (Relativity is currently under assault by Quantum and Superstring theory, and will probably emerge greatly changed). ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
[OGD] Re: "Bootlegging"
In a message dated 12/2/04 3:36:54 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Buying the journal rather than bootlegging it is a simple and obvious way to make a contribution. Again we come to the issue of what exactly constitutes "bootlegging", which Peter has not really defined. His statement implies that reading an article in the library is bootlegging, or borrowing a journal from a friend. The term is most commonly used to refer to recordings (audio and visual) copied for profit without authorization or payment of royalties. The San Francisco Orchid Society donates $1,500 a year to our local horticultural library (the Helen Crocker Russell at the SF Botanic Garden) so that they may maintain subscriptions to a number of Orchid journals, scholarly and otherwise, as well as purchase new Orchid books. When we, or the general public, make use of these journals are we "bootlegging"? This is not a lending library, and if we copy an article to read later are we "bootlegging" also? If so, what is the point of having libraries at all? ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
[OGD] Re: The market for Paphs
> "I think there are lots of Paphiopedilum growers out there and several > hundred producers. The problem is that the plants are all grown from > seed or they are divisions. As a result you will never see Paph > hybrids offered like Phalaenopsis, Oncidiums, Cattelyas or > Dendrobiums or any other group that can be clonally propagated" Here in California we see an awful lot of Paphs sold in the big box stores. Right along with the Phals, Odont intergenerics (Wildcats by the thousands), Oncidiums, Miltoniopsis, and "hard cane" Dendrobiums. They are mostly Maudiae types, both albescent and vinicolor, and they have the same low prices as the others. If they didn't move the buyers would phase them out. Clearly the market is there for seed grown crops. It must be there for superior clones if they could ever be produced at the same price. Hobbyists here in the Bay Area are fairly Paph crazed, but it looks like the general public here likes them as well. On a different note, Mark your Calendars now for the Pacific Orchid Exposition, coming up faster than I care to think about. February 17th-20th 2005. Festival Pavilion, Fort Mason Center, San Francisco, Ca. Dennis Westler ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids
[OGD] Re: Margaret and Plaxo
> "Comment, Margaret is just trying to get familiar with everyone, and > get your data for her address book. However, too much phishing like > this is done by unscrupulous persons, who will use your personnel > information to masquerade as you, and do all kinds of nasty things." > Actually, Margaret was just using Plaxo an online service that provides an easy way for you to update your address book. You click on the link (and thankfully, all links and attachments are automatically removed from postings on this digest), and find a form where you can list your telephone numbers, addresses, anniversary, birthday, and other stuff. Plaxo automatically sends this link out to everyone in your address book, and sends you the results. I have never used it, but several friends of mine do. Filling out the forms has not increased either the spam I get, or the occasional spoofing of my account which is periodically a problem on AOL. On to Orchids (so I am not entirely off topic): My Arpophyllum alpinum seems to bloom heavily in alternate years, and lightly or not at all in the intervening years. Is this just me, or has anyone else noticed this behavior? ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids
[OGD] Re: More Norris comments
Mr. Baxter writes: "It sounds little to me like George's well known proclivity to talk excessively might have contributed to his problem. I would suspect that he was under watch for more than Carnivore randomly picking him up. After reading hundreds of his posts I would suspect there were more key words that could be picked up that something as obscure as Kovachii. This is the sort of abuse that is allowed now that we have uninformed environmentalists who think they are saving the planet by cheering when such evil doers as George are brought to justice and made to pay the price." Pardon my ignorance, but I do not see how computer Surveillance software created for a conservative, non-environmentalist administration, or how overzealous enforcement of a flawed international agreement by agents of the same administration are somehow connected to environmentalists. Perhaps you could explain this. I also wonder if there any environmentalists stupid enough to assume they are "saving the planet by cheering...". The claims made by environmental groups, and academic institutions regarding the effects of habitat degradation and plant collection on species diversity are the result of carefully done and well funded studies (though there is a need for much more research, and certainly more funding). They are very different from the disingenuous claims made by the right wing which are often based on funding by special interests, outmoded religious paradigms, and a disregard for anything outside of their immediate visual field. I do not know Mr. Norris personally, but have seen in his postings on this forum and in private e-mail to me, a disturbing mean spiritedness, misogyny, and xenophobia. Despite this I would agree that probation would be a better punishment for his crime than a long prison term. If in fact the intentionally misidentified plants in question were nursery propagated rather than freshly collected, than his crime becomes one of convenience, and should be treated as such. Dennis Westler ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids
[OGD] Re: Species vs Hybrid
In a message dated 10/3/04 3:14:47 AM Pacific Daylight Time, Roy Lee writes: > "Les &Ann, you are on the right track. Sarc hartmannii x hartmannii > remains a species, as does Soph coccinea x coccinea. Any species crossed with > itself or two different clones of the SAME species are mated, continue to be > species. One may question this to remain so when you look at the difference in > flower quality in Odm crispum of today and a plant from the wild. The genuine > plant from the wild is one of the worst flowers you could see for an Odont > whereas the clones of today have the equal or better shape than some of the best > hybrids. > This of course is done by selective breeding over a long period of time. > As suggested by many, ' we are improving on nature rather than wait for > nature to do it.' I always ask how far we can go before we have actually created > a hybrid? > ROY" > It can also be said that both are hybrids. I have seen a distinction made between "Intraspecific hybrids" and "Interspecific Hybrids" (and been chided when I made the distinction that Roy does). The former would involve say, two clones of Sarc. hartmannii from different grexes, the latter two different species. As regards "superior" forms of Odm. crispum: if old RHS paintings, catalogue descriptions, and botanical magazines are to be believed, the fact that wild clones of crispum exhibit comparatively "poor" flowers has more to do with depauperization of the gene pool from collection to near extinction, than it does with line breeding. Just my two cents, Dennis ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids
[OGD] Re: Orchids Digest, Vol 6, Issue 346
> . By the way, do you > know if can be purchased here in the u.s.? A colored spiranthes would be > very interesting indeed! > This is the second request I have gotten about this! I got mine in a trade for some bulbs of a nice Pleione formosana clone I have. The man I traded with has just started selling a few locally at our shows (October- Orchidfest and February- Pacific Orchid Exposition). He is basically a hobbyist mostly growing Disas, Masdevallias, and terrestrials traditionally grown by the Japanese. He has no website or e-mail, and his English is pretty poor. I did a web search, but found no commercial sources in the first 6 pages of results (most results were Japanese or Chinese sites). I figure that there must be a commercial source here in the US, so you might try wading through the thousands of references that come up on Google. Thanks for the advise on culture! Check out the picture on Jay Pfal's site. The flowers though small, as expected are a really lovely pink with a white lip. Sincerely, Dennis ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids
[OGD] Re: Spiranthes sinensis, and use of "woofter"
In a message dated 8/21/04 1:36:23 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Perhaps he is a woofter as well. A quick web search confirms that "woofter" is a derogatory term for a male homosexual. There are enough gay men on this board, and in various Orchid organizations that people really should be a little more careful in their hurling of epithets. I too agree that Iris is not deserving of such bile from Mr. Easton. Her posts are full of information, humor and charm. Using the term "woofter" insults me, and many others; much as saying "like a Jew" to describe parsimony would insult many (like me, as a Jew also). People need both to respect others' differences, and think before they speak. On an Orchidaceous note, I recently was given Spiranthes sinensis, a plant I had long desired to have. Will this plant thrive in conditions suitable for Spiranthes odorata? Specifically, will it handle wet winters? Thanks, Dennis Westler ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids
[OGD] Re: Phals in sphagnum
In a message dated 8/18/04 3:46:13 AM Pacific Daylight Time, Ron Boyd writes: > Question on growing Phalaenopsis, species and hybrids. > Some professional nursery in Australia grow with spagnum moss and a fair > amount of heating in their nurserys. > Grow very well "but" suffer when taken into a hobby growers orchid house > were > the heat is not supplied in such amount. > Here in the States an increasing number of growers are using sphagnum or peat/perlite based "mud" mixes to grow their Phals. In working on the SFOS Orchid Doctor webpage, I find that a significant number of people who purchase phals grown in these media cannot keep the roots healthy. My assumption has been that due to the lack of heat, light intensity, and air circulation in most peoples homes (and I am dealing mostly with people who grow in their homes), the plants just do not dry out quickly enough. I imagine in a greenhouse the problem might be similar if you are running intermediate temperatures. People who repot into medium bark seem to have greater success. And of course, NZ sphagnum breaks down quickly if kept moist and given fertilizer no matter what the temperature range! Dennis ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids
[OGD] Re: Dr. Braem
> "it was the personal, baiting attacks of a few immature people on the > list, simply to get a rise from another person to the point they had no > option left but use profanity." -It was in fact the sincere request of a hobbyist about Habenaria rhodochila that started this whole thing. Guido's inappropriate, condescending response brought the same old flamers and trolls out of the woodwork, as they know how easy it is to push his buttons. It is a shame that someone so charming in public, and so well respected academically, can be so immature online. But we have all seen this in other venues. Those who jumped on the chance to goad him further (and we all know who they are) are beneath contempt, and have never been the source of knowledge Guido was. ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids
[OGD] Re: Unique floral and pollination characteristics
Martin Epstein writes: > I speculate that this makes cross pollination more common in orchids > than in most other flowering plants leading to a broadening of the > gene pool, rapid evolution and the fantastic diversity we see in > orchids today. > Great topic for speculation! Here's my comments. It seems to benefit most plants to avoid self pollination, and most have evolved mechanisms to assure their pollen reaches others. These include separation of the sexes onto different plants (occasionally practiced by Orchids as well), having pollen from a flower ripen either before or after the stigma is receptive, and chemical markers that enable a plant to recognize its own pollen. Given the nature of most flowers, it is also quite possible to be pollinated both with their own pollen and pollen from another plant. Personally I think the characteristics of the Orchid family that have enabled them to spread and diversify so amazingly are, consolidated pollen, and massive quantities of tiny seeds. This assures a broad range of genetic variability in each seed pod, and a wide spread of the seeds so that each generation is subjected to great selection pressure. I think this seed quantity and mobility also helps the cleistogamous species, which seems to include a lot of pioneer plants (when considering all families, not just Orchids). They need to have seeds carried long distances as they quickly create conditions no longer favorable to the germination of their own seed, and have to find the next clearing, road cut, landslide, or exposed treelimb. But they don't necessarily need the genetic variability, as they prefer a rather specific environment to germinate. ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids
[OGD] Re: "Roots Filling Pot"
Kathy B. writes: > "As long as I'm repotting I figured I'd ask another question which someone > like me should know the answer to already, but here goes. > > Myth or fact? > > Orchids will bloom once their roots fill the pot. > > I'd heard that one day and I wondered if it was true. It was said about > paphs, but it may hold true for other orchids too. Would add creedence to > using a pot just large enough to hold the remaining roots." > It seems to me that using a pot no larger than necessary when repotting most orchids assures that the potting mix does not remain wet for an inordinate amount of time. The roots then do not suffer from lack of gas exchange and the potting mix does not decompose too rapidly. As most orchids have a fairly free root run in nature (and have free access to fresh air at the roots), the idea of needing to fill the pot before blooming makes little sense. In the Paphs, which have neither pseudobulbs, nor succulent leaves, blooming might perhaps be linked to a root system large and healthy enough to provide sufficient stored moisture and nutrient. Though I have to say I have had slippers bloom for me with pitiful root systems (I just didn't know it till repotting time). Overpotting any kind of plant seems to be bad for plant health for pretty much the same reasons (excessive soil moisture levels, lack of air, and decomposition of the compost), but the pot sizes involved differ. Dennis Westler ___ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids
