Sunday, August 2, 2015

Anthurium no. 0351 "Pat McCooter"

When I started assigning drag queen names to the different seedlings, I didn't know how many names I was going to need, or how many drag queens were even out there in the first place. So I told myself that I was going to accept as many possible names as I could, without passing judgment on the possible offensiveness of the name (e.g. "Pat McCooter," hence this preamble), the performer as a person (e.g. Phi Phi O'Hara, who was memorably awful in RuPaul's Drag Race's 4th season), their act (e.g. Sharon Needles, who has occasionally tried so hard to shock or provoke that she's crossed the line into being blatantly racist, which, ugh), or whatever. And mostly I've done that.1 I've also tried not to investigate any of the real-life queens whose names I'm using, for fear of losing a name option, so you must never, ever, ever assume that getting a seedling named for some real-life queen automatically means that I know or approve of them or their act. As with most large groups of people, some of them are sure to be awful, and a few of them will be saintly, many of them will just be Not Your Kind Of Thing, and most of them will be all three to some degree or another.

This is all my way of noting that yeah, "Pat McCooter" is likely to be offensive or objectionable to some people who read this blog,2 and while I'm not necessarily happy if someone is given offense, I made a decision some time ago not to care too much about name offensiveness because I didn't think I could afford to get too picky.

As time's gone on, I've wound up with four separate lists of names. One, the "acceptable" ones which are currently being used, or in the queue to use for future seedlings, is very long (currently: 756 used, 636 queued). Two, a short list of names which would be acceptable except that part of the name names or implies a color, which only works if the plant agrees to bloom in that color, and since I don't know when I assign names what colors seedlings are going to bloom in, color-based names wind up being unusable.3, 4 Three, a short list of names which are so distasteful that even though I had previously decided that it was okay to use offensive names, I hesitate to use them anyway.5 Four, a long list of names awaiting judgment, most of which will wind up being discarded.6

This is all potentially overkill. At the moment, I only have enough room for about 800 seedlings, max, so in theory if I had a list of 800 acceptable names, I could just recycle those over and over. The trouble is that every time I think I've hit maximum capacity, I find ways to squeeze even more plants into the same space. There are no guarantees that I'm going to stay at 800, and odds are good that I'll find ways to keep expanding.

So that is my explanation for why this one is named "Pat McCooter." There is at least one real person who performs under that name, as well.7

Which I guess brings us, finally, to the seedling itself.

Pat is one of the seedlings in the mid-300s who have produced pink blooms. Seedling group AW8 is about 50-50 red and pink spathes so far, though Pat is the only AW sibling with a slightly orange spadix. Pat reminds me of no. 0276 "Zach Religious" more than any of the other AWs, but then Zach was also a 'White Gemini' seedling. They could easily be full siblings, just sown five months apart.

Pat's bloom photographed well, but the leaves are a little rough,

and the plant as a whole seems to have been struggling with some problem or another. Thrips, probably.

Is Pat a keeper? If forced to guess right now, I'd say probably not, but I'm reserving judgment. Once I've seen how this bloom ages, and seen how long Pat takes to produce a second bloom, I'll be better equipped to make a decision.


1 There is one drag performer whose act is so obnoxious to me that I made a deliberate early decision not to name a seedling after her. For obvious reasons, I'm not going to identify them by name here in the footnote, but you're free to guess. I'll confirm if someone guesses correctly.
2 If it isn't, rest assured that there's probably one somewhere in the list that is. Unless you're just really hard to offend.
3 Examples: "Billy Black," "Violet Chachki," "Mr. Green Teal."
4 I'm toying with the idea of assigning color-based names retroactively for seedlings where I don't like the current name, or where the current name was assigned before I started worrying about color-based names. Like if 0084 "Chocolate Sunrise" blooms in some color other than brown, as it almost surely will, I might assign it a new, more color-appropriate name. I haven't done it so far partly for fear of what this would do to the Anthurium-seedling paperwork, all the spreadsheets and stuff that would need to be changed. The paperwork fear has also kept me from swapping out a few names that strike me as less clever now than they did when they first went on the list. Probably I'll do at least a few name changes, sooner or later. Spreadsheets be damned.
5 A surprisingly large number of these are drag king names, for reasons which would probably become clear if I stopped and thought about it for a while. Examples: "Dixon Cider," "Sarahbelle Palsy," "Tatiana Rexia," "Hunter Downe," "Pussy Tourette."
6 Some of them are names that I came up with but think may not be clever enough, or drag-queenish enough, to use: "Blanche D'Almonz," "Angel-Bert Humperdink," "Ayleen Versus-Predator," etc.
Some are names that I haven't been able to decide whether they belong in the offensive-names list or not: "Glennda Orgasm," "Amanda Sue Punchfuk." (Though looking at it now, I'm inclined to say Glennda, at least, is okay.)
Some are names used by actual performers that I think may not be clever or memorable enough (a lot of these are also drag king names): "Jackson," "Mick Swagger," "Billy King."
Some are names I'm working on creating but only have half of, i.e., names in progress: "_________ Von Trapp," "Sprinkles _________."
7 I have been assuming, maybe incorrectly, that drag queen names tended to be punny in the past because it was dangerous enough to cross-dress without using your actual name, too. As long as you're a performer, and you're going to have to change your name anyway, why not change it to something that gets you a laugh in your introduction? As drag has gotten more popular and accepted, it seems that the names based in wordplay have been dying out in favor of names which advertise a personal relationship (like, it's not unusual for a performer to take the surname of a mentor; Roxxxy Andrews' name honors her drag mother Erica Andrews, for example), or which project a certain over-the-top glamour ("Trinity Kardashian Bonet"). Plus, it's now useful to have a unique name to perform under, for social media, Google searches, personal (ugh) branding, and so forth. But at one time, there were some drag names that, as far as I can tell, didn't belong to anyone in particular. "Anita Mann," "Ida Slapter," that sort of thing. "Pat McCooter" may or may not be one of those. There's definitely a performer in and around Memphis, Tennessee who performs under that name, but it's a common enough joke name that several of the sites that come up in a search don't appear to be related to that particular performer. Clearly, more research is needed.
8 (Seed parent: 'White Gemini;' sow date: 16 October 2012)

Friday, July 31, 2015

Anthurium no. 0255 "Steph N. Wolfe"

Anthurium 0255 "Steph N. Wolfe" isn't particularly unremarkable. With very long petioles holding the leaves far from the core of the plant, and no suckers to fill in any foliage around the base, she winds up seeming very large and spare-looking, though this is at least partly optical illusion: I didn't have any trouble finding plants that were considerably larger.1

This is sort of the sole point of interest about Steph. Leaves and inflorescences alike are fairly resistant to thrips damage, which is encouraging, and the blooms are, I suppose, about as good as a pink / pink could get.

Don't really have strong feelings about Steph either way, which means she probably gets to hang around for a while. There will be a purge coming, pretty soon, in which some of the stunted, thrips-damaged, non-blooming, or otherwise inadequate older plants will be disposed of somehow, but Steph won't be one of the purged ones.

By the way: I'm not sure whether the planned purge means I throw them in the trash, or take them to the consignment store, or what.2 There are too many plants needing larger pots to continue wasting space on plants that won't step up and be awesome, and I think giving a plant three or four years to prove itself is not unreasonable. We'll see how things go.


1 Notably 0314 "Camille Yen" and 0072 "Beth Rowe," both of whom are just monsters despite still being stuck in 4-inch pots. And they're still in 4-inch pots because they haven't tried to bloom yet. I'm considering moving Camille anyway, just to see what would happen if she had more room for her roots, because the foliage is lovely, and the last time I moved a plant up before it had bloomed, just because the foliage was nice, that wound up being 0334 "Jean Poole," who is now in my favorite five or so seedlings and has three blooms going simultaneously right now.
Though my expectation is that even if Camille did bloom, she would probably be pink / pink, like her seed parent (the NOID pink). Possibly a bad idea to expect lightning to strike twice.
2 Consignment store would be a more appealing option if I knew for sure that there weren't any thrips on the plants. I suppose I could try wiping off all the leaves by hand or something, immediately before bringing them in. I'd have a better shot at eliminating all the thrips from a particular seedling that way than I ever could by keeping the plant here.

Wednesday, July 29, 2015

Pretty picture: Odontocidium (?) Margaret(e?) Holm 'Alpine'

I'm not ordinarily a big fan of Oncidiums and their relatives -- objectively, I can be impressed by how many blooms, or an unusual color, or something, but I think my preferences run more toward single (or few) very large and elaborate blooms, instead of lots of smaller, simpler ones. When I come across an exception to that general rule, though, it tends to be a doozy.

I think the main thing I like about this is that the blooms are so large, relative to what I usually see, but the pattern is also great, and I like the colors, too. This one just pleases me in all the ways. (Except possibly for being fragrant, which I don't think it is but even if it were it wouldn't matter because I wouldn't be able to smell it at the show or remember it after the show.)

The ID on this one is confusing and uncertain. Of course. In 2008, I posted a photo of an orchid we were selling at the ex-job, which was tagged as Odontoglossum 'Margarete Holm,' but it didn't look anything like this -- different color, different pattern, smaller blooms. And, obviously, Odontoglossum, instead of Odontocidium.

The orchid registry where I usually get my ancestry information gives two results for "MargaretE Holm," but neither one is listed as an Odontocidium, so I don't know which one is the plant in the photo, or whether either of them is. one is an Oncostele (syn. Odontoglossum), registered in 1983, and the other is an Oncostele (syn. Odontioda), registered in 1988. The site doesn't have photos to go with the listings, which is understandable (it would be a lot more work, and it's hard to confirm the identity of a plant in a photo unless it's very distinctive or common), but that also leaves me without a way to choose one or the other.

An online image search leads me to think that it's probably the 1983 cultivar, making this actually an Odontoglossum instead of an Odontocidium as tagged, though that preference is based on a single Pinterest post. Ideally, one would like to have something a little more solid to base the guess on. I also found a Garden Web thread about a plant that sort of looks like this but with blooms that lean more to the pink/purple side than the dark red in my pictures. That one was sold as Margarete Holm 'Alpine.' A Garden Webber comes down on the Odontoglossum/1983 side, but . . . Garden Web is only barely more trustworthy than Pinterest, and only one commenter weighed in, so I wouldn't, like, want to bet someone's life on that being true.

And none of this explains the photo I took in 2008, which pretty clearly seems to be a different plant than this.

In any case, I like these photos -- if anything, the photos make it look better than it did in person -- and this was one of my favorite orchids at the 2015 show.

Next up, another Anthurium, this time no. 0255 "Steph N. Wolfe." Hopefully it will be less confusing than this.

Monday, July 27, 2015

Anthurium no. 0510 "Victoria 'Porkchop' Parker"

I have wondered, from time to time, why professional Anthurium breeders aren't spending more time focusing on foliage. It's easy enough to find variegated leaves on foliage Anthuriums like A. hookeri (also similar-looking but unidentified plants here and here), and of course there are A. andreanum hybrids with speckled spathes, like 'Peppermint Gemini,' but I've only ever been able to find one A. andreanum hybrid with variegated leaves, via, and I'm not sure that it's variegated on purpose -- there's no cultivar name given,1 the pictures are terrible,2 and I've never seen anything like it for sale.

Anthuriums do occasionally wind up variegated due to viruses; this conversation at mentions dasheen mosaic virus3 specifically, but obviously this is bad for the health of the plant, and of other aroids that happen to be near the plant, and there's no cure for it. The aroid experts in that thread say plants with dasheen mosaic virus should be destroyed, so as to prevent it from being spread to other plants.

Which brings us to 0510 "Victoria 'Porkchop' Parker."

Note: all photos of 0510 have had the color exaggerated somewhat in order to make the shape of the variegation clearer, and to make it easier to see variegation through the light reflected at the camera by the leaf surfaces. In person, the color contrast isn't anywhere near as dramatic, though it's easier to see through the reflections. So: the photos aren't accurate, but they still roughly approximate what you'd see in person.

Victoria has been producing mottled leaves since germination, and was actually one of a quartet of plants from the same sibling group4 that did so. 0405 "Crickett Bardot," 0509 "Felicity Charmichaels," and 0522 "Brandy Sheena Gunn," from the same sibling group,5 also had spotty, variegated-looking leaves, and while Brandy was always kind of sickly and eventually died, and Felicity lost the variegation with age, Victoria seems to be strong enough to continue to grow slightly variegated leaves, the most recent of which is in the photo above, and Crickett, though less vigorous, produces leaves which are thoroughly mottled.

0509 "Felicity Charmichaels" as of 17 March 2014. I would have added a more recent photo of Felicity, but -- she still looks like this except for the color, which is now uniformly green. The entire plant is only about an inch, inch and a half (2.5 - 3.8 cm) across. Not different enough to be worth a photo.

0522 "Brandy Sheena Gunn" on 17 March 2014. Brandy was only five months old in this photo, but you can see she had already pretty much checked out. (Amazingly, she lasted another nine months, not dying until December 2014.)

0405 "Crickett Bardot" on 25 July 25. Similar variegation pattern as Victoria's, but all the leaves are still pretty small. I came this close to moving Crickett into a larger pot last week, out of curiosity about what would happen, but there were other seedlings that seemed to need / deserve it more. I wish I had space to up-pot all the seedlings whenever I want, but alas.

I had zero familiarity with dasheen mosaic virus before I started writing this post. The best photo I could find of DsMV on an Anthurium andraeanum hybrid looks like this, which is sufficiently unlike my plant that I'm sort of inclined to think that that's not what's happening with Victoria,6 but I'm not a plant virus expert or anything.

DsMV is spread through insects. Outdoors, that's usually aphids, though I imagine thrips could do it as well. And if this is a virus, and thrips can spread it, then I should probably just assume that all my Anthuriums are infected even though only three of them have ever shown any signs of infection.

On the other hand, maybe it's not a virus. Maybe it's just variegation. In which case . . . still not that impressed, really. I mean, it's subtle enough to be hard to photograph, and even in person it's not what you'd call pretty.

Maybe that's why nobody bothers with variegated Anthurium foliage: even on the rare occasions when you get it, it doesn't really add anything. Or maybe perfectly lovely variegated Anthuriums have been tried and customers just didn't like them: customers do have notoriously awful and/or boring taste.7 Even if it's not possible to do variegation well, I still think there must be something else to be done with Anthurium leaves. We have plenty of neon yellow aroids: Epipremnum aureum 'Neon,' Philodendron 'Moonlight,' Spathiphyllum 'Golden Glow,' Philodendron hederaceum 'Aureum'/'Lemon-Lime,' Xanthosoma 'Lime Zinger,' Syngonium podophyllum gold something-something, etc. Surely it's not beyond our abilities to come up with a neon yellow Anthurium? Or what about an Anthurium that has red-brown new growth that stays red-brown? Something. I've seen plenty of variation in the shape and texture of my own seedlings' leaves, and we know A. andreanum hybrids can produce a lot of different-colored pigments when they need to; I don't think it's so outlandish to think that foliage could be a lot more diverse than what's on the market already.

In any case. "Victoria 'Porkchop' Parker" is probably not the vanguard of a new era in Anthurium foliage, but she's at least something of a puzzle. And maybe I'll get answers to that puzzle someday.


1 'Variegata' could, I suppose, be an actual variety name, for some species or genera of plant, but its a very generic, well-I-suppose-I-have-to-call-it-something-and-it's-variegated-so-I-guess-I'll-just-go-with-that? sort of name for a plant as heavily bred as Anthurium, so I suspect it's not an official cultivar.
2 Sorry, photographer, but deep in your heart you know it's true.
3 (abbreviated DsMV, presumably to avoid confusion with some other D- mosaic virus)
4 This is the best term I can come up with for identifying seedlings that all came from the same seed parent and were sown close enough to the same time that it's plausible for them to all be from the same pollination. Seedlings within a sibling group are therefore at least all half-siblings with one another, and presumably some of them are full siblings. At this point there are 82 active sibling groups here, with more coming on all the time as new seedlings germinate and get potted up.
5 Group "BF," sown on October 23, 2013 from seed parent 'Gemini.' It's been pretty sucky so far; the only other seedling from BF you've met is the famously terrible 0415 "Darby Dragons". Two others have buds, but they look pretty Darbyish, so I'm not getting my hopes up.
6 The main differences, as I see them: the borders of the areas affected by the virus in the picture are smoother and more rounded than on my plant, the virus seems to be confined to a single layer of the leaf, rather than being in two or three overlapping layers like on Victoria; and the lighter-colored parts on my plant don't follow the veins to the same degree as in the DsMV-infected plant.
The only way to find out for sure would be to send a sample to a plant-virus lab somewhere. At the ex-job, we went a poinsettia sample with a fungus to a lab through the Iowa State University Extension Office, once. It only cost $10, and the identification came back fairly quickly, though it didn't wind up actually help us that much in figuring out what we were supposed to do about it. I checked the ISUEO website and couldn't find anything about that program, so I don't know whether that's an option for me or not, but I'm writing this post way ahead of its publication (19-20 July), so by the time you read this I will probably have looked into this and found something out. (Edit 25 July 2015: I have still not looked into this.)
7 Someone is obviously buying those godawful glitter-and-spray-paint-covered poinsettias.

Saturday, July 25, 2015

Anthurium no. 0206 "Marcia Dimes"

0206 "Marcia Dimes" is something of a chameleon: if I'm comparing her to the pink spathes (like 0239 "Russ Teanale"), she's purplish-pink, but compared to the purplish-pink spathes (like 0231 "Rhea Listick"), she's pink. I mean, this isn't the most amazing thing in the world or anything, but it's unexpected: Russ is the only pink / yellow combination I've gotten,1 but there are a whole mess of purple-pink / yellow and purple-pink / white blooms, and they're all very close in color.2 I'm sort of surprised that it's possible to wind up with a color that's in between pink and purple-pink.

In any case. It's possible that this will be one of those cases where the first bloom is a different color from the later ones, too. Whatever color Marcia lands on, it'll be nice enough, I'm sure -- I am particularly fond of both the pink / yellow and purple-pink / yellows, so I don't think Marcia could actually get this wrong.

The leaves have two noteworthy qualities. The first is that they have an unusual texture. I spent a while trying to come up with a good description and couldn't, so I'll just leave it at, Marcia's leaves are less glossy, and the veins less prominent, so there's sort of an impression of smoothness happening.

This actually isn't something I like particularly -- I prefer glossier leaves, and more complicated-looking venation3 -- and it's not unique at all, but it's particularly noticeable with Marcia.

The other notable feature is that the thrips have mostly left the foliage alone. (The spathe too, as far as that goes.) This by itself would mean Marcia's a keeper, but then to have a nice bloom, in a pleasant / interesting color, on top of that? Yowza.

The plant is also relatively compact so far: long internodes have dampened my enthusiasm about a lot of the other seedlings. Among other things, plants with long internodes are much, much harder to water, because the plants get tangled in one another.

So there you have it. Not the best seedling ever,4 and not even my favorite from the recent batch of first-time blooms,5 but still in the top 25% or so of the blooms to date.

Next post: Anthurium no. 0510 "Victoria 'Porkchop' Parker," who is interesting even though she hasn't bloomed yet.


1 Unless you count 0040 "Ivy Winters." I'm not sure I do -- Ivy was sometimes a little too orange to call "pink." (The past tense is because Ivy is now living in Texas, not because she's dead. In case you were worried.)
Top row, L-R: 0035 "Alyssa Edwards," 0234 "Ross Koz," 0085 "Carson Trucks"
Bottom row, L-R: 0231 "Rhea Listick," 0259 "Tasha Salad"

3 More like these:

0005 "Chad Michaels" (L) and 0076 "Bob Humbug" (R)

Chad has the sort of color I like, plus an interesting shape and a high gloss; Bob I like mostly because the leaves show all the veins (which may be more obvious if you see the full size version of the photo) and are a bit thicker and stiffer, giving it a sort of leathery, reptilian texture. They both look like they'd be interesting to touch. Marcia, on the other hand, gives the impression that touching her leaves would be sort of like touching the back of a computer monitor, or some other matte plastic thing. Which is not that far off, actually.
4 The very short list of seedlings in the running for "best seedling ever:" 0231 "Rhea Listick," 0334 "Jean Poole," 0330 "Faye Quinette," 0120 "Eliza Boutisecksis," 0276 "Zach Religious." If the house were on fire and I could save one and only one of the seedlings, it'd probably be one of those five. But please don't set my house on fire so we can find out for sure, okay?
5 (That would be 0360 "Heidi Gosique," whom you will get to meet soon.)

Thursday, July 23, 2015

Pretty picture: Cattleya Purple Cascade 'Fragrance Princess'

I didn't actually notice any fragrance, despite the name, but then I never do, and even if I did smell something there would be no way to track it to its source, what with all the people and air currents and plants crammed cheek to jowl.

We've seen Purple Cascade before (2013), though possibly not this particular clone of it.

The picture's a lot better this time around, at least partly because I was able to get a lot closer to the plant. I did have to step over the fencing around the display in order to get the photo, but nobody seemed to object, or even to notice.

Cattleya Purple Cascade = Cattleya Interglossa x Cattleya Tokyo Magic (Ref.)

Monday, July 20, 2015

Anthurium 'Midori,' and nos. 0064, 0592

I sorta thought by this point that I would be up to writing new posts every other day, but every time I get close to being caught up, some new unusual thing pops up and I have to burn an afternoon on going to the dentist, buying potting soil, taking plants to the consignment store, mailing plants out, or catching up on the watering I didn't do the previous day because I was too exhausted to finish. Stuff like that. Consequently, I don't have time for the blog very often, and when I do, I usually don't have the photos ready for whatever post I want to write. So basically it's been six weeks of working as hard as I can and never quite getting caught up on anything, and I'm tired.

Quite a few Anthuriums have bloomed for the first time since I last blogged about 0112 "Dottie A. Rebel" way back on June 7,1 and there have been new first-time buds on many more, though some of those subsequently failed to develop.2 As usual, some of the new blooms are crap, most are boring, and a couple are very nice, but I won't tell you which are which because I'm still hoping to get actual posts written about all of those.

This post is not about any of those, though. This post is about the recent notable deaths.

[reader scrolls back up to the title, reads, scrolls back down]

Yeah, that's right. 'Midori' is gone, after about eleven months. I don't know what happened there, exactly: it was a watering problem of some kind, possibly exacerbated by excessively hot or cold temperatures, but by the time I realized that there was a problem, it was too late to determine what had caused it or do anything to bring the plant back. This is the first time I've completely lost a named variety of Anthurium in such a long time I don't even know how long it's been. (The NOID purple is kind of still on the ropes, but the original plant, after being cut back, has a single sprout, and I also rooted the cuttings I took off. One set of cuttings was potted up in soil and is living in the basement; the other is still in water and lives in the plant room. It's been a long time since I got a bloom, and will probably be a lot longer, but the NOID purple is not yet completely gone.)

'Midori' wasn't the best at producing seedlings, either, it turns out. I've potted up nine so far, of which four are still alive,3 and there are another 16 seeds in the cupcake containers in the basement, which may or may not ever get big enough to transplant, and may or may not survive transplanting. It sure feels like 'Midori' seeds germinate and grow a lot more slowly than seeds from my other plants, though I suppose I may just be impatient.

It turned out that I don't actually need 'Midori,' because at least one of my existing parent plants (probably the NOID red) already has genes for green blooms, but it was weird and I liked it and it makes me sad that it died.

The other two notable recent deaths 4 are 0064 "Augusta Wynndt" and 0592 "Tess LeCoil." Tess you'll probably remember from February, when I talked about her . . . unusual growth.

Photo: 22 January 2015.

It got bigger after that:

Photo: 11 March 2015.

For a while, the growth (one doesn't want to say tumor, though possibly it was) looked like it was even thinking of building some leaves -- you can see one in the above picture. I kept thinking, every time I watered it, oh, I should probably throw Tess away, there's no way that can be healthy, and if it's due to a virus or something I don't want it to spread to the other plants, but then I wouldn't throw it away because of the paperwork involved.5 Fortunately, it solved the problem for me, by spontaneously killing off that whole section:

Photo: 27 June 2015.

Though 1) by the time that happened, I'd thought maybe I should . . . enough times that I still felt sort of obligated to throw it out, and 2) it looked like possibly it was gearing up to do the same thing all over again -- that stumpy little green thing to the right in the picture seemed awfully familiar.

0064 "Augusta Wynndt" never built up her bizarre growth to the size Tess did, but only because I wouldn't let her. For a solid three years or so, Augusta grew normally, but at some point during this last winter (I think?), the growing tip started to do whatever Tess had been doing. So I cut it off, thinking that the plant might make new growing tips, which would have a normal shape to them, but apparently things don't work that way. (In particular, check out the larger lump on the left center, which may or may not be doing what Tess did but in any case is clearly not developing normally.) So Augusta and Tess were thrown away on June 23, and that is that.

So there you have it. The next Anthurium post will be happier. Or at least less morbid. Probably both.


1 New first-time completed blooms:
0206 "Marcia Dimes"
0255 "Steph N. Wolfe"
0281 "Laganja Estranja"
0288 "Cookie Buffet"
0335 "Donna Fanuday"
0346 "Lois Carmen DiNominatre"
0351 "Pat McCooter"
0360 "Heidi Gosique"
0373 "Shangela Laquifa Wadley"
0564 "Shannel"
0597 "Raven"
2 New first-time buds since 13 April 2015, with current bud colors (not necessarily the color of the completed blooms):
0147 "Denise O. Deanefew" (in progress, light pink)
0152 "Jay Love" (aborted)
0212 "Rogue" (in progress, pink-red)
0250 "Sheila Blige" (aborted)
0277 "Zach Treplica" (in progress, white)
0328 "Polly Esther Blend" (in progress, light orange-pink)
0338 "Anne Fibian" (in progress, dark red)
0361 "Willam Belli" (aborted)
0365 "Murray Hill" (in progress, red)
0371 "Deb Autry" (in progress, red)
0386 "Bjorn Innabarn" (in progress, purple)
0416 "Holy McGrail" (in progress, and "Holy" is not a typo for "Holly" -- light pink)
0467 "Regina Fong" (in progress, light orange-pink)
0487 "Polyfilla" (aborted, pink)
0488 "Regina the Gentlelady" (aborted, pink)
0558 "Amber Waves" (in progress, pink)
0561 "Belinda Chinashop" (in progress, red-pink)
0562 "Alex U. Good" (aborted, red)
0575 "D'Arcy Drollinger" (in progress, pink)
0586 "Vera Special" (in progress, red)
0595 "Josie P. Katt" (in progress, light pink)
0596 "Alisa Summers" (in progress, light pink)
3 Seedlings of 'Midori': (* indicates a seedling which is still alive)
1033 "Phoenix"
1092 "Mia Amor"
*1093 "Luna Stones"
*1094 "Ella Vawaydego"
1101 "India Vent"
1102 "Eden Fertu"
*1103 "Valeria T."
*1104 "Angel F. DeMornay"
1105 "Amy Vodkahaus"
The survivors are all still very, very young, and probably not all of them will survive long enough to bloom, but I'm really pulling for 1104 "Angel F. DeMornay," because she has the best name.
4 There are so many non-notable deaths -- 83 since May 1 -- that it's a huge pain in the ass to list them all. So I'm not gonna. And I think we can all be happy about that.
5 At this point, every time an Anthurium seedling dies, I have to update six different spreadsheets, and my Blogger profile, and pull a page out of the hand-written notebooks I keep for the Anthuriums. Which is my own fault, of course, for keeping so many different documents in the first place. They all have their purposes, though. I mean, I'm not sure there's any way to condense their information into a single spreadsheet and have it all still be accessible and useful.

Friday, July 17, 2015

Pretty picture: Paphiopedilum philippinense var. laevigatum

"Philippinense" is a difficult word to spell correctly. One L and two P's, as opposed to the more common "Phillip," with two L's and one P. Though I suppose if you spend a lot of time thinking or writing about the Philippines, you probably get used to it. (Though, then, do you start having trouble spelling "Phillip?")

I knew Phragmipediums could have ringlety petals (or are they sepals?), but I feel like I didn't know until now that Paphiopedilums could as well.

We haven't seen Paph. philippinense var. laevigatum, as such, on the blog before, but we've seen a named clone:

Paphiopedilum philippinense var. laevigatum 'Twin States' (2011 show)

one non-laevigatum variety:

Paphiopedilum roebelenii (more correctly, Paph. philippinense var. roebelenii) (2012 show)

and three of its hybrids:

Paphiopedilum Berenice (2012 show)
Paphiopedilum Judge Phillip (2012 show)
Paphiopedilum St. Swithin (2011 show; St. Swithin remains one of my all-time favorite orchids)

So I think it's safe to say we've got most of the Paphiopedilum philippinense bases covered.