Thanks Jose and Simon for the comments about Cattleya quadricolor.
Jose, you wrote : "Have you checked the entries for Cattleya candida?"
I mentioned in my original query that I am preparing an article on Cattleya quadricolor.
So, of course, I checked all the available info I could think of or have access to.
You wrote "Cymbidium candidum Kunth ... is the first description of the species that used to be known as C quadricolor."
So far, I have no reason to believe that Cattleya quadricolor Bateman is a not the valid name for the species.
You quoted "Cattleya quadricolor Lindl., Paxton's Fl. Gard. 1: 6 (1850)."
I do not have a copy of that mention at this time but if I am not wrong, there is no description which makes it a nomem nudum.
************ Simon, you wrote :
"there is another Cattleya candida."
Really ! The same name for two species ?
By establishing when Cattleya candida was first used to describe a species, we should be able to clarify what appears to be a confusion.
I do have a copy of the Gardeners' Chronicle mention of Cattleya candida by B. S. Williams.
You are right : it lacks a description.
Then, you mentioned "it is a synonym of what nowadays is known as Cattleya loddigesii Lindl., Coll.
Bot.: t. 37 (1826)."
That would be the clue, I believe.
When was Cattleya loddigesii described under the name Cattleya candida and by whom ?
You wrote : "Cattleya chocoense ... is still recognised as such by the RHS". The right spelling for the epithet is chocoensis.
********** Thanks for your interest.
Best regards,
Viateur
_______________________________________________ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids
