Unpopular Orchid Opinions

[Subrosa]

Originally Posted by isurus79

Yes, I also miss some of the more wild looking Cattleyas. One that comes to mind is purpurata breeding, which is removing the pinched sepals and petals while opening the tubular lip.

What does this mean?


I keep hearing about fungal infections from spag. What is the fungus and who is getting it? I've use spag in some capacity for 30 years and haven't ever gotten an infection.

An extinct species is gone. Completely gone, because
extinct is an absolute. Although you do occasionally hear people who should know better make the statement "extinct in the wild", I always wonder whether they don't know better or if they just think they need to talk down to people. A species which is no longer found somewhere it once was is not extinct in that place, it's extirpated from that place.

[Ray]

I did get a mild case of sporotrichosis once, many years ago. It was bumpy and itchy, but didn’t last long once I started applying a tea tree oil product.

[isurus79]

Originally Posted by Subrosa

An extinct species is gone. Completely gone, because
extinct is an absolute. Although you do occasionally hear people who should know better make the statement "extinct in the wild", I always wonder whether they don't know better or if they just think they need to talk down to people. A species which is no longer found somewhere it once was is not extinct in that place, it's extirpated from that place.

I completely missed the word extinct from the previous post and was wondering what you were referring to. I hit ctrl F and found it. My apologies.

---------- Post added at 07:35 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:35 AM ----------

Originally Posted by Ray

I did get a mild case of sporotrichosis once, many years ago. It was bumpy and itchy, but didn’t last long once I started applying a tea tree oil product.

Ah, I see. That's the first time I've heard of an orchid grower getting this. Good to know.

[Jeff214]

Originally Posted by Subrosa

An extinct species is gone. Completely gone, because
extinct is an absolute. Although you do occasionally hear people who should know better make the statement "extinct in the wild", I always wonder whether they don't know better or if they just think they need to talk down to people. A species which is no longer found somewhere it once was is not extinct in that place, it's extirpated from that place.

I used the phrase "extinct or near extinct" to imply the limited gene pool of a species, whether that may be in the wild or in cultivation. I phrased it that way to include the idea about populations in the wild that are gone, distinct from populations in cultivation (since selection pressure and time frame of changes may not be the same). You could say that it's a pointless distinction but I was getting at how different line-bred populations can look from what we've consider more "wild" looking.

I was just lamenting that if line-bred plants (that I don't particularly like) are all that is left while the rest disappear (from the wild and from cultivation) it is a disappointment for me. And like isurus79 and I both mentioned, those new purpuratas....! Man, I just dont like them, haha. Sorry if anyone does.

[Leafmite]

My unpopular opinion...the criteria for awarding species orchids might be erasing the uniqueness these species orchids once possessed.

Many 'species' orchids are starting to look very much like other species and the descendants of fragrant species are often no longer fragrant, even if they were known for their wonderful fragrance.

If a species orchid goes extinct in the wild and none of the orchids that descended from these have the fragrance and appearance of the original orchid, that orchid is truly gone.

[Ray]

Originally Posted by Leafmite

My unpopular opinion...the criteria for awarding species orchids might be erasing the uniqueness these species orchids once possessed.

Many 'species' orchids are starting to look very much like other species and the descendants of fragrant species are often no longer fragrant, even if they were known for their wonderful fragrance.

If a species orchid goes extinct in the wild and none of the orchids that descended from these have the fragrance and appearance of the original orchid, that orchid is truly gone.

Agreed. That sort-of thing happens a lot when critters are bred for specific traits.

For years, Collies were bred for getting long, tapered heads and it resulted in them literally having smaller brains.

However, unless the line breeding has gone on for a long time, it would seem that some of the other genes might still be present, and might be re-bred back into dominance.

---------- Post added at 08:17 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:00 AM ----------

I’ll add one to the thread: orchid growers specifying the USDA hardiness zone they are in. WHY? Unless you grow exclusively outdoors, it has very little bearing on what you may be able to grow.

[Subrosa]

Originally Posted by Jeff214

I used the phrase "extinct or near extinct" to imply the limited gene pool of a species, whether that may be in the wild or in cultivation. I phrased it that way to include the idea about populations in the wild that are gone, distinct from populations in cultivation (since selection pressure and time frame of changes may not be the same). You could say that it's a pointless distinction but I was getting at how different line-bred populations can look from what we've consider more "wild" looking.

I was just lamenting that if line-bred plants (that I don't particularly like) are all that is left while the rest disappear (from the wild and from cultivation) it is a disappointment for me. And like isurus79 and I both mentioned, those new purpuratas....! Man, I just dont like them, haha. Sorry if anyone does.

Think of the word "extinct" exactly like the word "dead". Dead is dead, with no degrees of death. You can only be a little bit dead in the movies, but you can certainly be almost dead as a species can be almost extinct. But if that near extinction includes the entire population of a certain area or even the entire wild population, that species is extirpated from the area, not extinct in it. When the last individual anywhere is gone, the species is then extinct. Or, as in the case of the ivory billed woodpecker which has apparently been recently rediscovered, mistakenly considered extinct.

---------- Post added at 10:41 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:35 AM ----------

Originally Posted by Leafmite

My unpopular opinion...the criteria for awarding species orchids might be erasing the uniqueness these species orchids once possessed.

Many 'species' orchids are starting to look very much like other species and the descendants of fragrant species are often no longer fragrant, even if they were known for their wonderful fragrance.

If a species orchid goes extinct in the wild and none of the orchids that descended from these have the fragrance and appearance of the original orchid, that orchid is truly gone.

What your referring to would be referred to as "functional extinction" by the same people who should know better than to say "extinct in the wild" but don't. The term is often used in referring to the American chestnut tree, which is far from extinct or even "functionally" so. There are individual trees which have resistance to the blight which decimated the species, and crossing these naturally resistant trees has produced increasing levels of resistance. It's just that this recovery isn't going to happen within the time frame of a human life, hence the lack of understanding.

[estación seca]

The IUCN, the International Union for Conservation of Nature, describes threatened organisms in these categories:

In descending order of threat, the IUCN Red List threat categories are as follows:

Extinct or Extinct in the Wild
Critically Endangered, Endangered and Vulnerable: species threatened with global extinction.
Near Threatened: species close to the threatened thresholds or that would be threatened without ongoing conservation measures.
Least Concern: species evaluated with a lower risk of extinction.
Data Deficient: no assessment because of insufficient data.

The IUCN explanations of these categories are available here.

An example of an Extinct in the Wild plant could be the tuberose, which everybody knows under the name Polianthes tuberosa. Europeans found it growing in Aztec gardens, but it is unknown in the wild. By the way, taxonomists have decided this plant is an Agave and have renamed it Agave amica.

[Clawhammer]

Complex paph hybrids are ugly and boring.

[Leafmite]

I wonder why a small group of people are allowed to determine what is beautiful. I think orchids, roses and other flowers that smell wonderful are beautiful and I do not understand why this is not a part of judging with these plants. It really should be.