Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Orchid Culture' started by Dale, Jan 2, 2009.
Anyone have a photo of it?
I dont, but I see that it is known as Pleurothallis macrophylla or even Elongatia macrophylla now if that helps.
I did find this picture: http://home-and-garden.webshots.com/photo/1034193186010380128PVFRpy
Thanks, Forrest. My plant is mis-named if the illustrated plant is named correctly. The flowers on my plant are produced in a raceme rather than a fascicle.
Walter Teague has an image on his website at http://www.pbase.com/plants_etc/image/24944660
It looks like it is in Icones Pleurothallidinarum XI; p. 80 if you want to look it up. I dont have that one, so I am afraid I am not much use there.
And here is a botanical plate of it. http://www.pbase.com/plants_etc/image/24944660
I'm just being a newbie here. I acquired my plant from David Morris c. 1983, out of bloom. David said it was similar to P. restrepioides, but much larger and robust, with much nicer flowers. It bloomed in it's season and I was in love. It bloomed once more then proceeded to die. Uncharacteristically, for large-statured pleurothallis, my plant produced keikeis from a few surviving leaves. I salvaged the keikeis and they did OK. The keikeis then approached blooming size, then they started to die. Once again the remaining leaves produced keikeis and I potted those in sphagnum moss. Those also failed, except for one. I moved that plant to IW conditions. That was 4 years ago and it's now producing a few spikes which appear eager to bloom.
Thanks, Forrest and Marni. If it's OK, I'll photograph the flowers and post them here.
"It looks like it is in Icones Pleurothallidinarum XI; p. 80 if you want to look it up."
I don't have that one. Could you scan, resize, sharpen, color correct, light enhance, medium tone, contrast/brightness adjust, and post it here? If it's not too much of a problem, of course.
well, if you had actually read what I posted instead of just skimming it, you might have noticed that I said that I did not have that one.
However, I believe that Marni does and I happen to know that she is wanting to work on her picture processing, so perhaps she could be talked into it, you know, as a "project"
"...well, if you had actually read what I posted..."
Sorry. Bad habit.
Since we are talking, do you mind if we visit an old topic?
I once posted a picture of a species, that had many hairlike protrusions. I mentioned in passing that it was hairy. I believe the species was Dracula robledorum.
So, getting to the point, you said that Orchids dont have hairs. If I remember correctly. However, I forgot what you referred to those hairlike protrusions. What was that again?
Well, if'n your serious and if'n it's on Page 80 of IP XI, I could be asked NICELY to scan it for you...
I'm just saying....
"I forgot what you referred to those hairlike protrusions."
I don't believe I said. I just said "Flowers don't have hair. Mammals do."
Cf p. 432 of The Manual Of Cultivated Orchid Species by Bechtel, Cribb and Launert; 1st Edition. On that page, there are eight illustrations of surface texture.
Ahh, I see. Well, I don't have the manual you reference. I did however come across an article written by a fellow whom I have come to respect in these matters and he references hair as it pertains to orchids. So, you could imagine my confusion. Perhaps you are even familiar with the article, it is in the last portion under the heading "enjoying your flowers" Linky
Let me throw in a reference to nigrohirsute dendrobiums. Those with the black hairs.
"references hair as it pertains to orchids."
You can't talk PhD to a third grader. 'Hair' is a well understood concept to almost everyone and communicates a general idea. I think you should call it whatever you think makes the most sense to you and is understood by the majority of people with whom you communicate. That's what I do, anyway.
touche my friend.
I'm waitin' for Karen to post the Wikipedia link to 'hair'. Real hair.
You guys are gonna go to hell for hijackin' my topic, BTW.