Fair enough. However, Peter, I am not the originator of the unrecognized sangii f. ayubiianum, and I do not mean to represent it as though I am, or that it is infact correct or accepted. I know it isn't. But without a more simple logos to explain it, I reprinted f. ayubiianum in hopes that others who have specific experience with this unrecognized form may respond. The fact that you looked it up and knew it wasn't correct should have clued you in to this.
Peter> Latin Peter> (or latinised) names are reserved for correctly-published scientific Peter> names and should not be applied, willy-nilly, to horticultural Peter> variants. It is easy enough to check if a Latin name has been Peter> published; if it hasn't then you shouldn't be using it. If you Peter> really, really insist on adding an extra name to one of your plants in Peter> order to distinguish it from others, then give it a cultivar name. What I don't understand, among many things, is why I am being attacked about this as though they are my plants, my personal naming, or my ego. You've gone off the hook a bit over someone who asked a question. Regarding incorrect Latin naming, I am well aware. You may or may not recall a website I created organizing and explaining the nomenclature of color forms, and the difference between varieties and forms. As to the staminodes, I cannot confirm either are not hybrids as I have only been sent an image of a picture. ST _______________________________________________ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) orchids@orchidguide.com http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
