Phal species care

[exasperatus2002]

Does the care of species Phals differ much from the hybrids we all started with? On my wish list (which is mostly Cattleya hybrids) I have a few Phal species added on. I have two noid Phals from home depot that are big and do well for me. Would I have to do anything different for the following species..

-Phal. Phal speciosa or Phal. tetraspsis (seen same pic used for both names perhaps a synonym of the other?)

-Phal. cumingiana

-Phal. fasciata

-phal. mariae

-Phal. modesta

-Phal pulchra

-Phal sumatrana

-Phal. leuddemanniana


Heres my home depot noid Phal's--

[exasperatus2002]

just an update...

The Phal pictured about is my longest bloomer ever. The first bud opened in the beginning of february and its got two left that are in perfect form. Theres also a subspike that recently seems to have enlarged. This is the first year its had subspikes.

[Brooke]

Here is info I have regarding the species you listed.

Speciosa is a variation of tetraspis. They are a thin leaved phal and require more moisture than the current phals you are growing. They also have the lowest light requirement of all the phals.

Most mariae are actually bastianii - if offered on Ebay, bastianii is probably what you will get. My basti is very easy to grow and bloom. True mariae are very hard to come by and if you have a source for a true mariae, I hope you share it with me.

The cumingiana is "probably" a coringiana. I can find no info regarding the cumingiana. Here is a great website for species and primary hybrids with pictures.

Phalaenopsis Orchids : species and primary hybrids

Modesta are supposed to be hard to grow. I don't have one but do have a couple of primary crosses with it and I grow them with a little more moisture than is typical for a phal because the leaves are quite thin on the crosses.

Most luddemaniana offered by non-phal specialists are actually pulchras when they bloom out. My first ludde bloomed as pulchra and I am waiting for another ludde to bloom but it will also probably be a pulchra since I got it from a regular vendor, not a specialist. My pulchra is very easy to grow and bloom and keiki.



My fasciata is very easy to grow and bloom - typical phal culture. I bought it last year with three spikes and this year it has six, some with branches and it is starting to bloom right now.



I do not have the sumatrana or the cornigiana but the ones mentioned above all keep their spikes for years plus produce new spikes and they eventually put on quite a show.

Hope this helps.

Brooke

[kmarch]

Originally Posted by Brooke

Speciosa is a variation of tetraspis. They are a thin leaved phal and require more moisture than the current phals you are growing. They also have the lowest light requirement of all the phals.

Brooke, are you saying simply that speciosa and tetrapsis are similar in their culture or are you saying that speciosa is nothing more than a botanical variety of tetrapsis?

[Brooke]

Kevin the official name is Phal. tetraspis var. speciosa so is a botanical variety. If my memory is working, I believe Christensen calls them sister plants but they came from different areas so he doesn't believe the one is a natural hybrid of the other.

There is a very slight difference in the foliage, one has slightly wider leaves, but both of them are very thin textured. They both require more moisture than a thicker leaved phal. Again Christensen recommends growing them in lower light than any other phal.

Sorry if I confused anyone but this is how I am growing mine.

Brooke

[brookn]

Phal. pulchra yum, that is so on my wish list. Sigh! That's a real beauty Brooke.

I absolutely agree with Brooke, my species have these beautiful, thin leaves, and they like to be more moist. My average hybrid Phals like to be drier, my species Phals I have in sphag. The only exception is my P. stuartiana, I have it in bark. I would also recomend you check into Baker's culture sheets for your species plants, I have found them to be very useful.

[kmarch]

Originally Posted by Brooke

Kevin the official name is Phal. tetraspis var. speciosa so is a botanical variety.

I'm afraid I have to correct you on this point. Phal speciosa and Phal tetrapsis are currently officially recognized as separate species. I haven't looked it up in my Christenson book so I'll take your word that he describes speciosa as a variety of tetrapsis. But at this point though, this arrangement isn't recognized by Kew Gardens for their list of officially recognized species for the purposes of hybridization. They currently recognize them as separate species.

While I highly respect Eric Christenson and refer to him and his writings frequenlty, I have to remind myself and others that it's the Kew species list and not Eric's Phal monograph, which the RHS uses for hybrid registration.

[janet_a]

all i know is they won't grow on my windowsill. i've got a half venosa that grows and blooms, but looks very sickly; another half venosa that's spent its life in a plastic baggie; a lud pulchra keiki that's also in a plastic baggie; a bellina that's not dead yet, but i've only had it since january, and oh, yeah: an equestris that grows like a weed.

[Brooke]

Great Kevin, I now have another mislabeled plant. Oh well, not my first and I'm sure won't be my last. Between genus changing names all the time and mislabeled plants, I end up with multiple name tags on so many of my plants.

On the bright side - I now have two tetraspis, one with red markings and one with purple. Not only are the beautiful to look at, the fragrance is outstanding.

Brooke

[psyc1210]

I have a hieroglyphica in aliflor, which it seems to be enjoying it. It's growing it's second leaf since Jan/Feb, and I have been told that they are normally slowwww growers. It's also been growing roots like mad, and I don't give it any special care