How to differentiate Cattleya jenmanii, gaskelliana, labiata and warneri

[Jan Pahl]

How to differentiate the "Cattleya labiata" complex?

The other day I made the statement that Cattleya gaskelliana, jenmanii, labiata and warnerii are the same species divided in 4 populations with internal characteristics that reflects first attempts of speciation thanks to geographical isolation and some ecological differences. Today I am going to share with everyone these differences.

1st) Very often, labiata have leaves that follow the same direction of the pseudobulb like small spears that “points the tip to the sky”, the other 3 species normally have a "normal” angle between the leaves and the pseudobulb (0º-30º)

2) Quite often warneri and gaskelliana have very broad leaves with "rounded” tips, and jenmanii-labiata often have more narrow leaves with "pointy" tips. Something that not implies that same shape or even the opposite shape could happen.

3) Petals in warneri and gaskelliana are often dropped like “donkey hears”, on the contrary petals in jenmanii and labiata are more "pointy" (erect). Something that not implies that same shape or even the opposite could happen.

4) Gaskelliana and jenmanii always produce single sheaths, even if they are some reports of jenmanii with double sheaths from the “wild” (maybe labiatas “informally” imported from Brasil), those “jenmanii” are still absent from cultivation. In the other hand labiata usually have double sheaths with the inner sheath the same size of the outer sheath, and warnerii also have double sheath but with the inner sheath noticeable small than the outer sheath. Warneri and labiata plants could produce single sheath or no sheath at all even in "double sheath" specimens, also but especially in "Ceará" labiatas “always single sheath plants” also occur on nature. Even if in literature Double sheath is cited has a good representative of species differentiation status, double sheath only means an adaptative response fixed in genotype to present or past climatic stress or predators (= minor adaptation).

5) Cultivated together at northern hemisphere at Parallel 10º in Venezuela (Behavior changes in different latitudes, especially between northern and southern hemisphere), warneri flowers in April-May with a possible second flowering period on December-January. Labiata flowers in September to November with a possible second period on May to July, Jenmanii flowers between February till April with a second period on august till November, and lastly gaskelliana flowers between April and July with a probable second not defined flowering period. It is possible to find few specimens of the 4 species in bloom outside the average months.

6) Gaskelliana very often have the anther support that standout while the remaining species don't have that feature (something that is possible to see not from frontal but in side column view).

7) Since labiata and jenmanii enters in dormancy before the new bulbs blooms and gaskelliana-warneri blooms in new formed pseudobulbs without any dormancy, them jenmanii and gaskelliana grow roots in new bulbs before bloom wile gaskelliana and warneri grow roots when flowers are still present or more probable right after it.

8) Flower duration and perfume are also used has differences (for example gaskelliana last something like 2 weeks and have a “minor” fragrance wile jenmanii could reach the month and have a “strong” fragrance), but since I grow my plants in open space and normally flower duration depends on environment, I don't have enough data to confirm this matter, specially on something so subjective like perfume.


Discussion:

Even if the 4 species have "mirror flowers", many people defend species status assuming that what in other Cattleyas are "extra useful differences when flower differences are not enough" is more than "enough" in labiata complex case. Also the same people say that flower similarity is the result of convergent evolution. Well that's not even a valid competitive "speciation" theory, lets explain myself, species diversity and also genetic studies points out that temperate large unifoliates are very recently evolved somewhere in the Colombian-Venezuelan Andes, and that South Venezuelan and Brazilian species are the more new ones of the group. Since the chance unifoliate cattleyas to migrate from Venezuela to Brazil could only occurred with less temperature and humidity on the tropics (something that means paleobotanical differences on vegetation), that chance almost with certainty occurred somewhere on the end of the Pleistocene-Holocene border, that means that with such a small time to diverged from each other, "convergent evolution" can't explain similarities here.


Even if all species could be "undistinguishable" from each other, very often "first glance" recognition mistakes with people that know well the 4 species are not ruled by complete chance, the more often found mistakes are between gaskelliana and warneri, between jenmanii and ceará labiata, and between Pernambuco labiata and northern Warneris, something that maybe in part reflects previous population relationships at the end of the Pleistocene-Holocene border in the 5 refugial areas we know today inside the “labiata complex”(1 for each species except in Cattleya labiata “vera” that have two).

The list could be long but almost all these differences not reach even near universality except of case nº 7, and in the cases it could reach near it like of example double sheath, resent careful research like the one made by Lou Menezes with labiatas and warneris in wild populations points to be careful with previous statements about almost universality, them the grower must consider all the differences plotted together in order to have valid conclusions differentiating the 4 "species" between each other.

All species share similar ecology of evergreen wet to very wet forests with some populations adapted to cloudy forest, semi-deciduous or deciduous forest, only one species is well adapted to a quite different ecology, Cattleya labiata from Ceará grows in a rather Arid semi-xerophytic area, something that shares more with species like C. lueddemanniana or C. maxima.

Maybe this 4 species aren't species at all, but at least they deserve from us to be treated like true species since they are walking to speciation and growers have to ensure the idiosyncrasy in cultivation of each population stay complete. That's our job has responsible orchid collectors.

Jan Pahl

[Mike O'C]

Originally Posted by Jan Pahl

How to differentiate the "Cattleya labiata" complex?

The other day I made the statement that Cattleya gaskelliana, jenmanii, labiata and warnerii are the same species divided in 4 populations with internal characteristics that reflects first attempts of speciation thanks to geographical isolation and some ecological differences. Today I am going to share with everyone these differences.

1st) Very often, labiata have leaves that follow the same direction of the pseudobulb like small spears that “points the tip to the sky”, the other 3 species normally have a "normal” angle between the leaves and the pseudobulb (0º-30º)

2) Quite often warneri and gaskelliana have very broad leaves with "rounded” tips, and jenmanii-labiata often have more narrow leaves with "pointy" tips. Something that not implies that same shape or even the opposite shape could happen.

3) Petals in warneri and gaskelliana are often dropped like “donkey hears”, on the contrary petals in jenmanii and labiata are more "pointy" (erect). Something that not implies that same shape or even the opposite could happen.

4) Gaskelliana and jenmanii always produce single sheaths, even if they are some reports of jenmanii with double sheaths from the “wild” (maybe labiatas “informally” imported from Brasil), those “jenmanii” are still absent from cultivation. In the other hand labiata usually have double sheaths with the inner sheath the same size of the outer sheath, and warnerii also have double sheath but with the inner sheath noticeable small than the outer sheath. Warneri and labiata plants could produce single sheath or no sheath at all even in "double sheath" specimens, also but especially in "Ceará" labiatas “always single sheath plants” also occur on nature. Even if in literature Double sheath is cited has a good representative of species differentiation status, double sheath only means an adaptative response fixed in genotype to present or past climatic stress or predators (= minor adaptation).

5) Cultivated together at northern hemisphere at Parallel 10º in Venezuela (Behavior changes in different latitudes, especially between northern and southern hemisphere), warneri flowers in April-May with a possible second flowering period on December-January. Labiata flowers in September to November with a possible second period on May to July, Jenmanii flowers between February till April with a second period on august till November, and lastly gaskelliana flowers between April and July with a probable second not defined flowering period. It is possible to find few specimens of the 4 species in bloom outside the average months.

6) Gaskelliana very often have the anther support that standout while the remaining species don't have that feature (something that is possible to see not from frontal but in side column view).

7) Since labiata and jenmanii enters in dormancy before the new bulbs blooms and gaskelliana-warneri blooms in new formed pseudobulbs without any dormancy, them jenmanii and gaskelliana grow roots in new bulbs before bloom wile gaskelliana and warneri grow roots when flowers are still present or more probable right after it.

8) Flower duration and perfume are also used has differences (for example gaskelliana last something like 2 weeks and have a “minor” fragrance wile jenmanii could reach the month and have a “strong” fragrance), but since I grow my plants in open space and normally flower duration depends on environment, I don't have enough data to confirm this matter, specially on something so subjective like perfume.


Discussion:

Even if the 4 species have "mirror flowers", many people defend species status assuming that what in other Cattleyas are "extra useful differences when flower differences are not enough" is more than "enough" in labiata complex case. Also the same people say that flower similarity is the result of convergent evolution. Well that's not even a valid competitive "speciation" theory, lets explain myself, species diversity and also genetic studies points out that temperate large unifoliates are very recently evolved somewhere in the Colombian-Venezuelan Andes, and that South Venezuelan and Brazilian species are the more new ones of the group. Since the chance unifoliate cattleyas to migrate from Venezuela to Brazil could only occurred with less temperature and humidity on the tropics (something that means paleobotanical differences on vegetation), that chance almost with certainty occurred somewhere on the end of the Pleistocene-Holocene border, that means that with such a small time to diverged from each other, "convergent evolution" can't explain similarities here.


Even if all species could be "undistinguishable" from each other, very often "first glance" recognition mistakes with people that know well the 4 species are not ruled by complete chance, the more often found mistakes are between gaskelliana and warneri, between jenmanii and ceará labiata, and between Pernambuco labiata and northern Warneris, something that maybe in part reflects previous population relationships at the end of the Pleistocene-Holocene border in the 5 refugial areas we know today inside the “labiata complex”(1 for each species except in Cattleya labiata “vera” that have two).

The list could be long but almost all these differences not reach even near universality except of case nº 7, and in the cases it could reach near it like of example double sheath, resent careful research like the one made by Lou Menezes with labiatas and warneris in wild populations points to be careful with previous statements about almost universality, them the grower must consider all the differences plotted together in order to have valid conclusions differentiating the 4 "species" between each other.

All species share similar ecology of evergreen wet to very wet forests with some populations adapted to cloudy forest, semi-deciduous or deciduous forest, only one species is well adapted to a quite different ecology, Cattleya labiata from Ceará grows in a rather Arid semi-xerophytic area, something that shares more with species like C. lueddemanniana or C. maxima.

Maybe this 4 species aren't species at all, but at least they deserve from us to be treated like true species since they are walking to speciation and growers have to ensure the idiosyncrasy in cultivation of each population stay complete. That's our job has responsible orchid collectors.

Jan Pahl

Jay, thanks for the much appreciated and useful information on how to differentiate the four named species. My problem is how do you differentiate Cattley gaskelliana from Cattleya mendelii? I keep buying plants labelled as one or the other of these two species but they always look the same as what I have got. They are starting to flower now (summer here). Cattleya labiata flowers in autumn and warneri in spring so I do not have a problem with those. I have only once bought a Cattleya jenmanii but when it eventually flowered it was a white and I am sure was wrongly labelled. Anyway it died!

[Jan Pahl]

Hi Mike, nice to met you.

For me Cattleya mendelii resembles much more in shape to Cattleya trianae (without the truncated lip) or to the very fringed lips found in Cattleya mossiae (without the elongated lip), than to C. gaskelliana, but maybe to you resembles very much to gaskelliana because both species have many light colored cultivars, something that I completely understand can cause confusions.

You can differentiate C. mendelii flowers because is the unifoliate with less yellow on the throat, normally is more cream surrounded by white than real canary yellow, and this yellow don't extend to much outside the very-near-vicinity of the throat. Of course you will find intermediate cases, for example, gaskellianas that resembles this pattern, so you can make another distinction in the flower column (Gaskelliana very often have the anther support that standout)

In vegetative behaviour you will find more differences, for example, C.mendelii has a vigorous and compact growth habit, and when the plant manage to adapt to new conditions, it would grow quickly into quite large specimens.

The other feature is that C. gaskelliana never flowers from old spathe, if the spathe don't show flowers growing inside before or very near the pseudobulb forms new roots, them you can be sure that this particular pseudobulb is not going to flower never, In the other hand, C. mendelii can grow spathes up to two years before flowering.

C. mendelii in average blooms from april to may and C. gaskelliana do the same in April to July... but even if C. mendelii and gaskelliana can overlap part of flower season, It is very difficult to find C. mendelii blooming outside that period, in the other hand C. gaskelliana can flower with no problem outside flower season.

I hope this help.
Jan

[Mike O'C]

Jan, I must apologise. When I saw your message I thought that it came from Jay Pfahl and so I called you "Jay". Jammer (sorry!). Will have to sit down and digest what you have told me. It would be easier if I had the plants flowering in front of me. One of the plants that I have labelled as Cattleya gaskelliana is in bud and should be flowering soon if the snails do not get to it first.

[Jan Pahl]

don't worry is not the first time I get mistaken with Mr Jay Pfahl, what I never thought was that a Dutch-Afrikaans speaker didn't recognize my name hehehehe... By the way, my oma is south African (Stellenbosch).

Talking about Orchidspecies, be careful with the Cattleya photos pictured there, for example, the C. gaskelliana "white form" is a typical C.mossiae., and the "another clone" pictured in C. gaskelliana don't resembles to much "C.gaskelliana" (Maybe is a C.mendelii)

IOSPE PHOTOS

In the other hand C. mendelii seems to be ok

IOSPE PHOTOS

[Mike O'C]

Originally Posted by Jan Pahl

don't worry is not the first time I get mistaken with Mr Jay Pfahl, what I never thought was that a Dutch-Afrikaans speaker didn't recognize my name hehehehe... By the way, my oma is south African (Stellenbosch).

Talking about Orchidspecies, be careful with the Cattleya photos pictured there, for example, the C. gaskelliana "white form" is a typical C.mossiae., and the "another clone" pictured in C. gaskelliana don't resembles to much "C.gaskelliana" (Maybe is a C.mendelii)

IOSPE PHOTOS

In the other hand C. mendelii seems to be ok

IOSPE PHOTOS

Jan, Stellenbosch is a pretty university town. Have you been there? Some time back I tried to sort out the problem of Cattleya gaskelliana v Cattleya mendelli and down loaded and printed out the photos of the two species from IOPSE and have them stuck in the book "The Cattleyas and their relatives : Volume 1 Cattleyas". Must say that the 4 photos (2 in the book and two from IOPSE) only added more confusion. I looked in the book (Volume 1) on Colombian Native Orchids and there are a number of clones of Cattleya mendelii illustrated but all so varied that they might as well be different species.
There is no illustration of Cattleya gaskelliana probably because it is from Venezuela. So I will have to keep trying. Incidentally I was going to photograph my plant of Cattleya gaskelliana but the snails beat me to it!!

[Jan Pahl]

David I've been in Cape town, Stellenbosch and Betty's bay many years ago visiting my great parents, but since the rest of my family from my father side live between Germany, Holland, USA and Venezuela, normally I see my Oma outside South Africa. I love your country, cape province have one of the most beautiful floras, landscapes and best temperate climates in this planet

Talking about unifoliate Cattleyas there isn’t a easy one paragraph way to answer your inquiries, photos can be deceitful, specially because flower proportions is distort and 3-D architecture is responsible for almost all main differences, and on the other hand human perception tends first to look at flower color and pattern something that normally don't serve to distinguish close related species.

There is no need to talk about C. rex, C. dowiana, C. maxima, C. eldorado, C. lawrenceana, C. lueddemanniana and C. warscewiczii because this group is quite easy to recognize even in photos maybe because they are the more "antique" of the unifoliates phylogenetically speaking.

On the other hand the rest….

Trianae, chocoensis, schroderae, mendelii, percivaliana, mossiae, gaskelliana, jenmanii, labiata and warnerii.

… Always share the same color and color pattern phenotypes and that’s why they look so much alike. All of them share or at least partially overlap the same color possibilities, all share the same kind of stripes on the labelum or the same triangular shape of the solid spot (except in mossiae, percivaliana and some mendeliis that are elliptical).

You can always differentiate the Trianae complex (trianae, chocoensis, schroderae) from the rest because they always have truncated lips and the others never have that feature.

Trianane complex Internally have many difficulty’s to distinguish between species (something analogous to labiata complex), especially between many trianae and quadricolor, and many trianae and schroderae…

¿How you can "differentiate" trianae from the rest of his own complex?

- Chocoensis always have "bell shaped" flowers, colored column tips, usually have leaves that can roll without broken, always have few light flowers per spike, quite small to medium sized, and they are more "squared" in flower geometry than the rest.

- Schroderae plotted against trianae have a very distinctive odor, the internal yellow spot normally is more "orange" than trianae, this species have even more flowers than trianae, usually Light in color specially in the segments outside the concolored labelum, and the more "trumpet like" labelum of all three

Since I've yet talked about "labiata complex" and I gave more than enough information about mendelii, so the only two species that remain are mossiae and percivaliana.

Cattleya mossiae is easy to recognize because that species always have a very fringed frontally elongated lip like a spoon unique to that species (percivaliana also have very fringed lip but is much more rounded), with percivaliana also shares that is the only species that often mix a lot the yellow with the other lip colors but both species do that in different ways, mossiae produces "reds and ochers" wile percivaliana have a very ample array of art shade colors like yolk, orange-yellow, fruity purples (Guava), etc. Also flower shape is different, (percivaliana is much more rounded than the typical mossiae with fallen petal-shoulders). Both species flowers always once per year, percivaliana normally in season (autumn to early winter), and mossiae always in season from old and new pseudobulbs at the same time or very near (winter to all spring in Andean mossiaes and spring to early summer in coastal mossiaes). The last thing to mention here is that percivaliana is the only unifoliate that have an unpleasant defensive odor (like recently cutgrass).

Well that resumes some of the main visible differences between the more difficult species to distinguish. The following table maybe will help you further.

Species that always flower from new pseudobulbs… that means before or in the near vicinity new bulbs grow new roots (flowering normally occur once per year inside flowering season).

C. warneri
C. gaskelliana
C. eldorado

Species that also can flower from old pseudobulbs or even back pseudobulbs with spathe (all species normally blooms once per year inside the flowering season but asterisks “*” are for species that only can bloom once per year without any possible second flowerings).


C. labiata
C. jenmanii
C. percivaliana *
C. quadricolor
C. trianaei
C. schroderae
C. mossiae *
C. mendelii *

Has I said before is possible to differentiate each species from the other almost all of the time except in few cases, the "trianae complex", the "labiata complex" (the more difficult of all), and the tendency to separate aurea from dowiana, something is incorrect except if we consider “patriotism” has a “valid” difference (what I mean here is that aurea is an artifact species that plots some very unstable or even fabricated differences between different demes of the same species that inhabits Costa Rica, North and South Panama, and north West Colombia).

Hope this help.
Jan

[Intruder]

Very interesting subject. Some time ago I also tried to do an EXCEL table showing (for the different species you are speaking) the various steps of a pseudobulb development (from a lead production to flowering). As for example:
Cattl. mossiae/ Start production of a new lead : July - End of pseudobulb grow: September - Production of the sheath : November - The flower appears in the sheath: March - Flowering: May (maybe the chronology of this example is not correct). I had written the names of the various species in the left column and the various growth stages as columns titles. As usually the last right column has for title "Observations".
Unfortunately I don't have enough experience in the large-flowered species culture to do alone a such table. A such table would be very practicable because having these under the eyes we will be immediately able to see what is different from one species versus the others. Because I never see in the literature a such table, is it possible to do these with your help and also with the help of the others cattleya enthusiasts of this forum these table?
Excuse me for my english which is probably not very accurate but this is not my native language ... I am from the French speaking country of Belgium.

[Jan Pahl]

Thanks for the info and don't worry for your "vallonian" English, I nether speak English properly (my English is more Spanglish that the real stuff).

At least in Venezuela, after the mossiae blooming season is over the plants forms new leads that when are completely formed in Autumn they rest for several months till a second grow starts to form. Usually both growths flower at the same time but could be possible that sometimes "back pseudobulbs" with "dry sheath" blooms something like a month early than the new pseudobulbs with "green sheath".

Is difficult to put dates because flowering times varies even if individual plants behaves like true living "clocks" that year after year blooms at almost exactly at the same calendar date.

Is possible to differentiate mossiae in two main populations that even cultivated together still flowers differently.

The mossiaes from the south facing Andean Region from Táchira depression all the way to Portuguesa-Lara_trujillo state confluence starts to bloom first showing some individuals between December to February and them in April to March the vast majority of plants blooms

The second is the mossiaes from Yaracuy highlands and the north and South Coastal range at north central Venezuela. This mossiaes could flower from April to July with few individuals flowering between August and September.

Simply there is no mossiaes in flower between October and November and mossiaes at December or September are quite rare but not impossible events.

The other thing is that mossiae never flowers twice a year except in some known albas and semialbas, something that could be that the same genetic influence that controls color also effect flowering season, or on the contrary it could be hybrids since not all albas and semialbas behave that way.

another thing with Cattleya mossiae is that there is no such thing like a true Dark mossiaes, all extremely dark mossiaes in cultivation are "C. gravesiana" or on the contrary more complex hybrids that show this condition in flower shape and the exaggerate thick column typical in complex hybrids.

[Mike O'C]

Originally Posted by Jan Pahl

Thanks for the info and don't worry for your "vallonian" English, I nether speak English properly (my English is more Spanglish that the real stuff).

At least in Venezuela, after the mossiae blooming season is over the plants forms new leads that when are completely formed in Autumn they rest for several months till a second grow starts to form. Usually both growths flower at the same time but could be possible that sometimes "back pseudobulbs" with "dry sheath" blooms something like a month early than the new pseudobulbs with "green sheath".

Is difficult to put dates because flowering times varies even if individual plants behaves like true living "clocks" that year after year blooms at almost exactly at the same calendar date.

Is possible to differentiate mossiae in two main populations that even cultivated together still flowers differently.

The mossiaes from the south facing Andean Region from Táchira depression all the way to Portuguesa-Lara_trujillo state confluence starts to bloom first showing some individuals between December to February and them in April to March the vast majority of plants blooms

The second is the mossiaes from Yaracuy highlands and the north and South Coastal range at north central Venezuela. This mossiaes could flower from April to July with few individuals flowering between August and September.

Simply there is no mossiaes in flower between October and November and mossiaes at December or September are quite rare but not impossible events.

The other thing is that mossiae never flowers twice a year except in some known albas and semialbas, something that could be that the same genetic influence that controls color also effect flowering season, or on the contrary it could be hybrids since not all albas and semialbas behave that way.

another thing with Cattleya mossiae is that there is no such thing like a true Dark mossiaes, all extremely dark mossiaes in cultivation are "C. gravesiana" or on the contrary more complex hybrids that show this condition in flower shape and the exaggerate thick column typical in complex hybrids.

Jan,
Two points :
1). When you mention a month, let us say "December" for instance, is this the northern winter or is it the southern summer. In other words does the plant flower during the short days of winter or the long days of summer? It would be better to use the seasons of the year rather than the name of a month because members in different hemispheres interpret will have to interpret months differently.
2). I like Intruder's suggestion of an Excel type table with the species name in the first column and then in the following columns such information as you are now giving us. Do you think that that would be possible?