It Ain't Bulbophyllum makoyanum

[Bikerdoc5968]

This was labeled B. makoyanum. I was told that it was the "true makoyanum" as apposed to what is sometimes called makoyanum but is probably B. Daisy Chain. As you can see, much to my surprise, it just isn't what I thought it was going to be. So maybe you can all give me some help and provide me with an ID... I am reasonably certain it is a Bulb species and not a hybrid.

[Bikerdoc5968]

Well I thought the flower looked familiar and I think it may be Bulbophyllum Louis Sander which flowered for me from a different plant which I posted earlier this year.

[jeffrey6115]

Looks like Bulb putidum to me. Check out my post in December.

[Bikerdoc5968]

Thanks Jeff. I think you may be correct. On closer examination, B. Louis Sander not only has a central line on the lateral sepals but multiple dots which B. putidum does not. So this would be way cool!

OK saw your post from 12/11/09 and the lateral sepals of yours has spots also.... so using that as a way of positive ID isn't going to work. I have read there is some confusion as to the name because of renaming and such and sometimes is sold as B. ornatissimum or Mastigion fascinator. This reference is interesting reading. http://www.orchidsonline.com.au/node/3072

[jimec]

Hi Howard,

Your plant is Bulbophyllum appendiculatum.

Jim Cootes

[Bikerdoc5968]

Thanks Jim.... could you tell me.us how you arrived at this because I have read about how these get names changed because somebody finds it somewhere else and places their own name on something that has already been named.... just what some education, I'm not doubting your expertise.

[jimec]

Hi Howard,

It is an interesting question as to how I arrived at the name I gave you for your plant. How does one explain 35 years of experience looking at species orchids? I also have a mountain of reference books to which I often refer. Then there are the contacts I have throughout the orchid world, both botanists/taxonomists and growers.

As I have said before taxonomy is an inexact science and it all boils down to personal opinion.

Some people prefer to keep Bulbophyllum in the broad sense so if that is the case your plant is Bulbophyllum appendiculatum. Then there are those that prefer the group narrowly defined then your plant is Mastigion appendiculatum. Then there is the group that likes to use Cirrhopetalum as a genus so your plant would be Cirrhopetalum appendiculatum.

The names we give to plants are only so us enthusiasts can communicate about a plant and know (or hope) that we are talking about the same entity.

I don't know if I have answered your question as you would like but it's the best I can do.

All the best,

Jim Cootes

[Bikerdoc5968]

Jim, your response is just excellent. I'm not at the enthusiast level as yourself and certainly don't have the reference materials, years of experience nor the contacts as yourself. And for the most part, names are, as you said, a means of discussing a plant and being on the same page. Beyond that, for me, whether it is a Bulbophyllum, Cirrhopetalum or Mastigion makes little difference. Thank you so much...

[jeffrey6115]

Thanks from me as well Jim. Guess I'll have to relabel my plant.

[Bikerdoc5968]

Ya gotta love this forum if not for the education then for all the wonderful people.
Posted via Mobile Device