Is this really a Phal. cornu-cervi fma. chattaladae?

[Jayfar]

I see Phal. cornu-cervi fma. chattaladae available in spike from a well-regarded grower, but is this really a fma. chattaladae? The picture shows a small amount of barring, which makes me wonder.

http://www.orchids.com/_img/content/...g/NF1802_1.jpg

Same catalog picture larger, found in google image search:

http://static.panoramio.com/photos/o...l/34826532.jpg

I have a smaller (not in-spike) fma. chattaladae on the way to me from Louisiana Orchid Connection (which I'm more certain of, based on the description), but I'm considering also buying the in-spike one from the other grower, even though it costs more than I usually spend.

The LOC one is described: "Our offered stem propagated plant is from a selected Chinainthorn f1 cross of Phal. cornu-cervi fma. chattaladae ('Oun' x 'Pravit Chattalada' JC/AOS)" and their picture sure looks like the real McCoy.

http://webgallerydisplay.com/image.php?id=28056

[goodgollymissmolly]

Jayfar, here is mine which I believe to be chattaladae. At least it was sold to me by a well known Phal source as such for a lot of $.

It seems that the red overlay varies to some extent in opacity and coverage in individual samples. I'm sure the completely red ones are the most desirable (not mine unfortunately)

Phal connu-cervi f. chattaladae JCL_0259 by kentucky4, on Flickr

[camille1585]

I may be wrong, but I think that a true chattaladae is a solid dark red, and anything else it just a 'plain' red form of Phal cornu-cervi.

[goodgollymissmolly]

That's an interesting point. There is a form known as sanguinea where the bars show through and its said to have a green or yellow picotee (kind of like my picture). Neither chattaladae or sanguinea is officially described so they are just horticultural forms leaving a lot to the imagination.

They are both just cornu-cervi from a technical perspective so I guess the buyer (or seller) can pretty well make up his own mind. I hate these horticultural varieties and forms, but I guess there's no avoiding them.

[camille1585]

Actually, chattaladae has been admitted as being an botanical species. I looked it up again (chattaladae.comThis website has great info on the history of this Phal) and it was discovered in the wild twice, although 25 years apart.

[Jayfar]

There's actually an entire website devoted to the fascinating back story of Phal. cornu-cervi fma. chattaladae

chattaladae.com: Phalaenopsis cornu-cervi fma. chattaladae

EDIT: I see camille1585 has already pointed out that site up-thread.


and a related big leaf forum thread

Big Leaf Orchid forum - View topic - chattaladae.com

Also, at one time Phal. thalebanii was considered a species apart from cornu-cervi and some pictures found for that form show some barring particularly on the inner half of the lateral sepals.

[Jayfar]

Originally Posted by camille1585

Actually, chattaladae has been admitted as being an botanical species. I looked it up again (chattaladae.comThis website has great info on the history of this Phal) and it was discovered in the wild twice, although 25 years apart.

I'm not finding it listed as a species, or does botanical species mean something different than the common use of the term species? Phal. cornu-cervi fma. chattaladae is a forma of the species cornu-cervi as I understand it. I suppose an argument could be made for chattaladae as a sub-species, but I'm not a taxonomist nor a botanist, so I really don't know how that works.

[goodgollymissmolly]

No Camille, chattaladae is not accepted by KEW as a variety or form of cornu-cervi. In addition I am unaware that any valid description that has been published that could lead to eventual acceptance. It appears to me that several other forms of cornu-cervi might get accepted first (those have not been officially described either as far as I know). Sanguinea could easily include chattaladae and would have at least historical priority (at this point neither has descriptive status so no priority whatsoever).

Color simply is not a defining botanical characteristic so I doubt any of these is going anywhere officially.

[camille1585]

I was only giving a short summary of what's on the chattaladae website! Perhaps they mean it's botanical, as in it occurs naturally in the wild as well, and isn't just a man made creation.

[dope.fatboy]

According to the above mentioned website there are only two known cultivars in the US aside from the recently created F1 generation. So an easy way to check is to ask the vendor for the parentage. If it isn't progeny from those two plants then it isn't chattaladae.

The website also says that the flower is solid red, which I take with a grain of salt if other people are saying that reputable vendors are selling some with barring. Best to ask the vendor for the parentage.