Guarianthe (formerly Cattleya)

[kmarch]

I just learned today that the RHS has accepted a generic name change for 4 species and 1 natural hybrid formerly classified as Cattleyas. The new genus into which they have been placed is: Guarianthe.

The 4 species affected are:
Cattleya aurantiaca - now - Guarianthe aurantiaca
Cattleya bowringiana - now - Guarianthe bowringiana
Cattleya patinii - now - Guarianthe patinii
Cattleya skinneri - now - Guarianthe skinneri

The natural hybrid affected by the name change is:
Cattleya x guatemalensis - now - Guarianthe × guatemalensis

This along with the renaming of the Brazilian Laelias as Sophronitis and the reclassification of Schomburgkias (which i'm still researching - stay tuned) will have a significan impact on the generic names of many of our orchids.

For example: many of us have the wonderful and famous Cattleya Chocolate Drop (C. guttata x C. aurantiaca) in our collections. Because the aurantiaca is now Guarianthe, the new generic name for Chocolate Drop is now Cattlianthe Chocolate Drop.

[chefatplay]

Kevin, my grower said my Onc. Mendenhall 'Giant' was reclassified also. Can you refresh my memory and tell me what is now? I believe it starts with a "G"? Many of these proper names are hard for me to get in my mind until I read it several times. Must be the time bandit...

[Anton]

At our Orchid Club meeting last Wednesday one of the guys, who is a judge as well was showing slides of various comps he had attended and showed top plants from them.

Time and time again he mentioned Colmanaras and when I quizzed him on it he told me people don't want to change to Odontocidium.

I then asked, shouldn't it be up to the judges to force the name change to correct terminology? His answer to that was most of the growers and judges had been in the game a long time (indicating 'ol timers) and don't take to name changes to well.

What's your comments on this, I am just curious, from a trainee judge who doesn't fit the 'ol timers tag.

[kmarch]

Originally Posted by chefatplay

Kevin, my grower said my Onc. Mendenhall 'Giant' was reclassified also. Can you refresh my memory and tell me what is now?

It's Psychopsis Mendenhall.

[prisana]

Here I go again ..making corrections in my log book.. Thanks for the heads up Kevin..I wouldn't have known otherwise.

[kmarch]

Originally Posted by Anton

At our Orchid Club ... he mentioned Colmanaras and when I quizzed him on it he told me people don't want to change to Odontocidium.

Well Anton, truth be told, I don't want to change the names either (it sure would be easier) but ultimately I have to ask myself the question: Am I going promote the understanding and clarity of orchid names or am I going to promote confusion and inaccuracy?

I would like to see orchid growers, especially those who run nurseries, and orchid judges be professional and make the effort and promote understanding and clarity in orchid names. Not doing so will result in 2 different sets of names for our plants. In my opinion, having a system by which different groups of orchid people call plants by different names is far worse than a system that is flexible and contains occasional name changes.

Originally Posted by Anton

I then asked, shouldn't it be up to the judges to force the name change to correct terminology?

Force? Instead of "force" an we use "take the initiative to educate"? I do think judges should use the correct names themselves and I do think judges have a role in educating growers and hobbiests and clubs on the name changes. Judges are often asked to speak at club meetings and this might be an opportunity to be helpful in this respect. But the responsibility does not lie with judges alone. Nursery growers should take the time to tag their plants correctly and pass correct info on to their customers. Clubs should educate their members and those clubs that host shows should make sure that plants entered in their shows are properly named as members of the general public who attend the shows should not be subjected to mis-tagged plants. If a club felt they didn't have the expertise to do this, I'd be happy to help them out. And finally as hobby growers, we should know about the plants we're growing (I could cite several forum members who are great examples of people who are eager to understand their plants in this way).

Sometimes these name changes can be daunting but if each of us carried even a little of the load I honestly feel it wouldn't be that bad.

[arleneg]

Kevin,

Several days ago, I received an email from a fellow orchid society member about the name change. My initial reaction was "just when I'm getting to know all the names, they change it". (sigh)

As the new newsletter editor of my local orchid society, I've already included the info on our next issue since about half of the members don't have email addresses. Therefore, I mail out hard copies.

It will take a while for many of us to become familiar with the new names. When we finally learn it, then it will change again.

[chefatplay]

Kevin, as always, thank you again for the new information. I have updated my tag. In my head I'm memorizing, psychopsis, psychopsis, phychopsis..... Is it pronounced fi cop sis or si cop sis. Oh heavens, I have so much to learn. Thank you for your patience.

[Tobi]

Kevin,
I believe I read about this nomenclature genus change a few weeks ago.
Are these former Cattleyas the cool to intermediate ones from Central America?

[Anton]

kevin, there are acouple of judges in our club who actually do write on the plant information slip "Next time please label this plant as XXXXX. as this is the correct name for it".
That's what I mean by "forcing" the changes.

DON'T TAKE ME SO LITERALLY........ Sheeesh.

[fred]

thats a good idea Anton

I also think and I hope my Society does this is to have a speaker at one of the monthly meeting,s to let the members know of the name changes.
Plus a print out may also be good.

[kmarch]

Originally Posted by arleneg

It will take a while for many of us to become familiar with the new names.

I'm in the same boat as you arleneg, especially with the 5 Cattleyas I've posted about in this thread. The new generic name for them is so different.

Originally Posted by arleneg

When we finally learn it, then it will change again.

Well maybe, not necessarily. The Cattleyas had been Cattleyas for ages....decades even. So it's very possible that the 3 changes that have recently been topics of discussion on this forum, namely Colmanara Wildcat, the Brazilian Laelias, and these 5 Cattleyas, could stick for decades as well.

Originally Posted by chefatplay

In my head I'm memorizing, psychopsis, psychopsis, phychopsis..... Is it pronounced fi cop sis or si cop sis.

si-COP-sis

Originally Posted by chefatplay

Oh heavens, I have so much to learn.

You and me both!

Originally Posted by Tobi

Kevin,
I believe I read about this nomenclature genus change a few weeks ago.
Are these former Cattleyas the cool to intermediate ones from Central America?

They are Central American orchids and I know that aurantiaca can tolerate quite cool temps. I have not grown the other species so I'm not as sure about those.

Originally Posted by Anton

kevin, there are acouple of judges in our club who actually do write on the plant information slip "Next time please label this plant as XXXXX. as this is the correct name for it".
That's what I mean by "forcing" the changes.

Yeah I think that's a great idea! I actually talked to a grower at a recent about a couple of his tags and he thanked me for the info. My impression is that more often or not people appreciate receiving the info.

[chefatplay]

psy chop sis, psy chop sis... mantra of the day. I'm just glad I'm not into catts. Cattinis, yes, cattleyas, no.

[Cynthia, Prescott, AZ]

The change to Guarianthe took place several years ago, and I recall reading that the name was chosen to reflect some aspect of the people in the area where it grows. Then a short time later, I read that the change to Guariathe was off for some reason, don't remember why, and I am thinking so much for 'showing respect for the indigenous people'. So now it is back on again it seems. I am not changing any tags. Count me an old fogy. There are some benefits of getting old. You can be as obstinate as you want, and no body complains.

[snowballsarebad]

So I decided to look up a plant of mine on the RHS grex names. It's an LC Ken Battle "Gold Crown". Apparently, with the new name changes in laelias and cattleyas...my plant is now Guarisophleya Ken Battle. Great, what an elegant name.
Of course, I could be wrong. I'm gonna look up some of my other cat hybrids and see what they are too.

[_cor]

Opps to fast!

[_cor]

Hi Everyone,

Was just reading this theard and though i might inculde the following sent by Brain Milligan to the OSCOV judges. I think most of this has been covered by Ken but just more food for thought!

Cory

A CAT’S BREAKFAST by Brian Milligan
Over the years, taxonomists have regularly assigned species orchids to new or different genera, to the consternation of many horticulturalists who specialise in species orchids. Wisely (as I have recently come to believe), the RHS subcommittee responsible for hybrid nomenclature refused to acknowledge these changes, because their introduction would mean retrospective changes to the names of a whole hierarchy of orchid hybrids. Sander’s List of Orchid Hybrid Names would have needed to be revised and reprinted regularly, an exercise deemed unworthy of the necessary time and expense involved.

However, RHS policy has recently been changed to accept name changes in both species and hybrids, probably because computerisation now makes it possible to do so. As a consequence, many orchid hybrids now have new names. The old names, many as familiar to us as members of our family, have been expunged from the computer records, and replaced with a dog’s breakfast of totally new names. A few examples from the Cattleya Alliance (Laeliinae Alliance) will illustrate how many hybrid name changes result from just a few basic changes to species nomenclature.

Most of the changes arise from:
• acceptance of Rhyncholaelia glauca and R. digbyana as the names of species once known as Brassavola glauca and B. digbyana, respectively.
• the transfer of about 70 Brazilian Laelia species to the genus Sophronitis, and
• the transfer of several Central American Cattleya species to the genus Gaurianthe.

As a result of the first change, the genus Brassolaeliocattleya has gone, to be replaced (in some cases) with Rhynchosophrocattleya. The grex name remains unchanged.

As a result of the second of the above changes, most sophrolaelias are now sophronitis hybrids, and most laeliocattleyas are now sophrocattleyas. The only exceptions are those hybrids made using Mexican laelias, such as Laelia anceps. The names of these remain unchanged, as do the grex names.

As the result of the third change (see above), many cattleya hybrids have been given new names. This is because the well-known species, Cattleya bowringiana, C. aurantiaca and C. skinneri, are now known as Guarianthe bowringiana, G. aurantiaca and G. skinneri, respectively. The intergeneric hybrid between Guarianthe and Cattleya has been named Cattlianthe, while that involving Cattleya, Guarianthe and Sophronitis has been given the name Guarisophleya.

A few familiar hybrids, together with their new names, may help to explain why I’ve called my article A Cat’s Breakfast!

Sophrolaelia Orpetii -------------------Sophronitis Orpetii
Cattleya Chocolate Drop--------------Cattlianthe Chocolate Drop
Laeliocattleya Molly Tyler-------------Guarisophleya Molly Tyler
Laeliocattleya Parysatis--------------Sophranthe Parysatis
Brassolaeliocattleya Goldenzelle-------Rhynchosophrocattleya Goldenzelle
Sophrolaeliocattleya Pink Doll---------Sophrocattleya Pink Doll
Cattleytonia Why Not----------------Guaritonia Why Not

You will be pleased to know that the names of Cattleya Bow Bells, C. Bob Betts, C. Bonanza, Sophrocattleya Beaufort, and Sc. Hawaiian Beau remain unchanged but these seem to be in the minority. The older judges among us may throw up our hands and decide not to bother with the new names but younger members of the Panel should bear in mind that progressive cattleya hybridisers are soon likely to begin selling their new Cattleya Alliance hybrids with updated name tags.

As I’ve said before, judging wasn’t meant to be easy! BM

[pikevi]

The reluctance shown by growers in adopting the name changes may be due to the fact that the potential 'buyers' may still be looking for orchids under the old names and miss the very orchids that are looking for because of the new names.

Both the customers and sellers are impacted on a short term.

[Cynthia, Prescott, AZ]

Well, I have noted a game that many hybridizers have been playing. It is to be the first to make a particular complex hybrid of a previously uncombined set of genuses, and put your name on the that combination for all time to come. I was helpful in creating an Epidendrum X Sophronitis x Myrmecophyla, and if I was into that sort of thing, I could have requested the grower to name the combo Schnitzerara, but I am not. Think of the field day that is possible with Guaranthe. How many things can a Catt alliance be crossed with. Anyone out there want there name on some combo? Better act fast and grow the plants well to get a rapid blooming, or some one else will beat you to it. And I expect we have a lot unhappy hybridizers who have lost their immortality with the loss of so many laelias (now Sophs) to combine with other plants, their genus names now going into the trash can.

[arleneg]

Kevin,

I'd like to get more info on which other genus names changed. Can you point me to a website that lists them?

[kmarch]

I've not found a place where the changes are listed systematically. A while back, when Anton shared the Miltonia changes, that info came form the Wildcat website. I've searched the RHS updates (available in PDF form at: http://www.rhs.org.uk/learning/publi...hid_hybrid.asp) nd found tons of info on newly registered hybrids but nothing on the changes in genera. Short answer: I dont' know but would love it if someone out there does. Please share!

[Cynthia, Prescott, AZ]

Holly cow batman!! The RHS software and data base are in pretty bad shape. Hope they get it straightened out soon. I was researching Epidendrums, to try to ID a particularly fine reedstemmed NOIDy. Would you believe that Epidendrum mariae (1937) [Encyclia mariae (1952), Prosthechea mariae (1997), and Euchile (1998), according to Jay Pfal)] has different parent entries for the plant as Epidendrum, Encyclia, and Prosthechea, and lots of each in the RHS data base. Then I see that Epidendrum vitellinum is still an Epi, even tho Jay has it making the grade to Prosthechea [Epi (1831),Encyclia (1961), and Prosthechea (1997). E. vitellinum certainly is not an Epidendrum, it is very much Encyclia like (my opinion, not Jay's). Then there is the problem that I get more hits for a plant as parent than is listed. But I am not seeing the missing pages any more, so I assume they are working on the problem. Then there is the problem that as you track some exotic combinations to down to the most recent crosses, you suddenly see all the new names revert to the old LC/BLC/SLC system since they probably have not invented new names yet. I think this name change thing in the RHS data base was done prematurely. I wonder if they kept all the old files to revert back if they got into trouble. And can you imagine them going thru this whole traumatic upheaval again when they solve this sophronitis lumping problem?

Some clarifications in red.

[kmarch]

Originally Posted by Cynthia, Prescott, AZ

... according to Jay Pfal)]

Jay Pfal's not the final authority on what name a particular orchid settles into, so not intending to knock him too hard, the site is great for some purposes, don't put much reliance on any of the taxonomical info you find there. Jay himself has on the site the disclaimer that the info in his site is mostly given to him by users of the site.

Instead look to recognized taxonomical authorities and to the RHS since they are the ones responsible for registering the hybrids we grow and their Monocots checklist of orchid species is what is used as the basis for registering those hybrids.

Originally Posted by Cynthia, Prescott, AZ

I think this name change thing in the RHS data base was done prematurely. I wonder if they kept all the old files to revert back if they got into trouble. And can you imagine them going thru this whole traumatic upheaval again when they solve this Sophronitis lumping problem?

While I have not formed an opinion on the Prosthechea change yet (but so far it seems ok I suppose) I agree with you 100% and shake my fist in the air regarding the Laelia/Sophronites debacle. I am more concerned though, that it appears as though the RHS may have abandon its heretofore conservative and slow-to-adopt-change stance in favor of a lets-keep-up-with-the-flavor-of-the-day approach. The rush to adopt a change before the dust settles in the taxonomic community serves no purpose.

[Bolero]

This has been coming for a couple of years. I was surprised when I first read about it but heard that the names would remain the same as usual within the hobby and only be changed by people in the scientific community.

Clearly this won't be the case and we will all have to start using them. Thanks again Kevin, I guess it will take time but we'll get used to it.....;-)

[kmarch]

Originally Posted by Bolero

... heard that the names would remain the same as usual within the hobby and only be changed by people in the scientific community.

I have to say I chuckled when I read this Bolero. I can just see some "set-in-their-ways" orchid veteran (maybe even a judge?) engaging in some good old-fashioned wishful thinking.

[Orchidflowerchild]

I'm still hearing rumours about how there is supposed to be a paper presented at the WOC in Jan that is going to refute the Sophronitis lumping.

-Cj

[Tobi]

Question on the Guarianthe natural hybrid Guarianthe x guatemalensis. The
name guatemalensis refers to the cross between G. aurantiaca and G. skinneri. What is the correct interputation of the word guatemalensis? It's
not a genus (not capitilized).

[Cynthia, Prescott, AZ]

It is capitalized if it is a cross of aurantiaca and skinneri, because it is a hybrid. However, the natural hybrid, where it may be some odd percentage of each parent, as it grew in an area of over lap between the species and may have been mixed may times, I believe is supposed to have a lower case g. Someone will have to verify that for me. I am a little ticked at the orchid world for making these crosses (because there are not enough of the natural ones from the over lap area), and then confusing things by not keeping the parentage thing straight. The beauty of the natural hybrids is that they can come in a great variety of colors, while the man made hybrids are pretty much are just one color.

[Tobi]

Thanks Cynthia. I understand the odd percentage of parentage occuring in
natural hybrids. But I'm still not clear in this case if guatemalensis is considered a genus. If it is not, then what is it?

[pikevi]

Originally Posted by Cynthia, Prescott, AZ

The beauty of the natural hybrids is that they can come in a great variety of colors, while the man made hybrids are pretty much are just one color.

I am a bit curious about this statement. Is it because orchid growers all over use the same species for hybridization and in nature many different species get involved?

Thanks.

[kmarch]

Originally Posted by Tobi

But I'm still not clear in this case if guatemalensis is considered a genus. If it is not, then what is it?

Its the grex. The "grex" is the name that takes the place of the species name in hybrids. Guarianthe is the genus (or generic name).

[kmarch]

Originally Posted by Cynthia, Prescott, AZ

The beauty of the natural hybrids is that they can come in a great variety of colors, while the man made hybrids are pretty much are just one color.

Originally Posted by pikevi

I am a bit curious about this statement. Is it because orchid growers all over use the same species for hybridization and in nature many different species get involved?

I dissagree with the notion that a natural hybrid produces more variety than a man made hybrid. Afterall all of our species breeding stock were at one time wild plants. It is true that primary hybrids exhibit less vareity than complex hybrids because complex hybrids draw from a larger gene pool. Maybe Cynthia meant to say primary instead of natural?

[Orchidflowerchild]

Originally Posted by pikevi

I am a bit curious about this statement. Is it because orchid growers all over use the same species for hybridization and in nature many different species get involved?

Thanks.

In the wild, where two species that share a common pollinator overlap, a thing called a hybrid swarm develops. A hybrid swarm is a population made up of breeding back and forth between the two species. In the example of Guarianthe x guatemalensis, you have G. aurantiaca x skinneri, but you could be looking at, say, (aurantiaca x skinneri) x skinneri, or it could go back toward the aurantiaca. The point is that a population will have both species involved, the direct progeny from them crosses back to the parents, with siblings, etc, etc, etc. It isn't as simple as there being G. aurantiaca and G, skinneri that combine to from G x guatemalensis, but that all of the plants in a given area are breeding back and forth, with genes flowing all over the place.

-Cj

[Cynthia, Prescott, AZ]

Sorry if my statement was viewed as applying to natural and man-made hybrids in general, at least not to general hybrids, just to the attempt to reproduce the natural hybrid. I meant this specifically for cases like aurantiaca and skinneri, an orange crossed with a lavender (orchid color). This will generally, in the first generation, give you something of an in between color, and I have no idea what the RHS would do for naming if you went 2 generations. The wild population of guatamalensis will vary from yellow to lavender, with some very interesting art shades. Please cancel any idea that I was taking about man-made hybrids in general.

[pikevi]

Thank you, kmarch,Orchidflowerchild and Cynthia.

Cynthia: It was not my intention to find fault with your statement. Having a very basic knowledge in genetics I could not 'follow' the logic. It is all clear now.

Orchidflowerchild: That was a good walk-through.Thank you. In any case the first and the susequent filial generations will inherit genes from the two 'parents' only: be it in nature or in the laboratory.

kmarch is absolutely correct in his statements. Infusion of new genes will result in many more varieties of phenotypical and genotypical expressions.
While any characteristic can be expressed for at least 16 filials, characteristics controlled by multiple alleles (recessive) will completely mask the phenotypical expressions of associated characteristics.

I hope genetics works in the same way in humans, animals and plants!

[kmarch]

Originally Posted by pikevi

Infusion...phenotypical and genotypical expressions...filials...alleles...phenotypical expressions

Whew!!!!!!!

[pikevi]

LOL, kmarch.

I am trying to understand Orchids as much as I can but without much success .

Some of you have so much info I am trying to tap on that

If all else fail I will just enjoy the flowers without looking beyond them

ps: May be I should not talk about genetics since I can't even differentiate a Beallara (or Miltonia) from a Cattleya

[kmarch]

Originally Posted by pikevi

I am trying to understand Orchids as much as I can but without much success

I'd dissagree as it seems like you're pretty much asking all the right questions to learn so (like all of us) keep up the seeking and asking.

Originally Posted by pikevi

Some of you have so much info I am trying to tap on that If all else fail I will just enjoy the flowers without looking beyond them ps: May be I should not talk about genetics since I can't even differentiate a Beallara (or Miltonia) from a Cattleya

No, no, no, DO talk about genetics! I just need to play catch-up with some of the terms. You'll eventually come to differentiate between different genera. It's like acquiring any other skill. It''ll come.

By the way...what are: filials...alleles?

[Orchidflowerchild]

Originally Posted by pikevi

Thank you, kmarch,Orchidflowerchild and Cynthia.

Cynthia: It was not my intention to find fault with your statement. Having a very basic knowledge in genetics I could not 'follow' the logic. It is all clear now.

Orchidflowerchild: That was a good walk-through.Thank you. In any case the first and the susequent filial generations will inherit genes from the two 'parents' only: be it in nature or in the laboratory.

kmarch is absolutely correct in his statements. Infusion of new genes will result in many more varieties of phenotypical and genotypical expressions.
While any characteristic can be expressed for at least 16 filials, characteristics controlled by multiple alleles (recessive) will completely mask the phenotypical expressions of associated characteristics.

I hope genetics works in the same way in humans, animals and plants!

Pretty much, yes. In continuing discussion of genetic drift, consider G. aurantiaca. THe pigments in G. aurantiaca are karetetinoid in nature, running in the yellows, oranges, and near-reds. There is likely no actual alba variety of anything that is actually G. aurantiaca. Albescent varieties of the species would be a clear, unmarked yellow (a la G. aurantiaca 'Miami'). White varieties and some yellow varieties are very likely introgressed with G. skinneri, with most of the genetic drift toward the G. aurantiaca side, with colour dominance coming from the introgression with G. skinneri. Varieties of G. aurantiaca such as var. pachoi (sometimes refered to as a species) are likely of examples of of such genetics.

Oh, and incidentally the term for that sort of back and forth flow of genes in a population is "introgression". If you care to look it up, there is a very fascinating chapter in Withner's The Cattleyas and their Relatives, Vol. I: The Cattleyas that deals with introgression in the genus Cattleya, and the section on Guarianthe (as Cattleya) x guatemalensis has a lot of specific information on the hybrid swarm of G. x guatemalensis, itself.

-Cj

[pikevi]

Thank you , Orchidflowerchild.

I was barely able to follow that one . I wish I knew more about Guarianthe or cattleya. Would I be right is assuming the G. skinneri is red or pink?

kmarch: I think these terms are used to be specific in expressing the sequence of events in 'sexual' reproduction.

They ,however, also can be explained in many other ways.

Filial (F) refers to the offspring from a single 'pair' of parents. If a number is
attached to it, it denotes the 'generation'. Thus F1 will be the first set of offspring. If members of F1 reproduce , the next set of offspring will be F2... and so on.

Allele is a set of 'genetic coding'[base pairs A-T;G-C (abbreviation for 4 amino acids Adenine,Thymine; Guanine,Cytosine)], which is found on a specific location(locus) on a chromosome. An allele also can be a gene and 2 alleles ( one from each parent) will form a characteristic ( genotype).

In reality,however, it is not that simple since many characters are controlled by many genes (multiple alleles) and they in turn may be found on many different chromosomes (multiple loci) and MORE importantly in locations that are mis-matched on male and female (haploid) chromosomes. Two haploid chromosomes (one from each parent)will make the 'normal' chromosome (diploid) that is found in our cells.

It gets further complicated by the fact (in humans) that the male 'Y' chromosome (22 +X+Y) and female 'X' chromosome (22+X+X)enter into the mix: females DO NOT have 'Y' chromosome.

Some of the foregoing apply to humans ONLY.

(BTW,The genetic coding in ANY living organism on earth is done with the two base-pairs of amino acids - the 4 amino acids mentioned above. There are a few exceptions which are outside the scope of this discussion and which do not occur in normal reproduction)

I hope this info helps a little.

[Orchidflowerchild]

Yes, G. skinneri is lavendar-pink with coerulea and various types of albescent varieties known.

As for genetics, plants can get REALLY complicated with functional tetraploids and even hexaploids out there.

-Cj

[Tess1]

Now I have a headache!!!!!!!!

[pikevi]

yea!! Recently I had a chance to look at many Phals. all labeled 'Wedding Promenade' pink and I can't say I saw any two orchids with similar looking flowers

Thanks Orchidflowerchild.

Tess1: aspirin is on its way