Talk:Phragmipedium

The species classifications are very difficult to follow in this Genus. Every few years, another 'expert' arrives on the scene and makes changes in the names, and more confusion arises.

The RHS (Royal Horticultural Society) will only recognize 'their' list of 'valid' species names when registering a hybrid, and in recent years, has relegated a number of 'Registered Hybrid Names' to synonyms of other registered hybrids when it decided that the species known as 'ecuadorense' was not a valid species, but instead was a synonym of 'pearcei'.

Now it appears that another 'new' name has appeared on the scene, 'popowii'. If this is a 'new' name for an already existing named species, my question is simply WHY ?, especially if the 'previous name' was used to register Hybrids.

I'm very far away from being any sort of taxonomical person, but as a layman I question the methods used in some cases, as it seems to be nothing more than a way to simply get the taxonomist's or another person's name in print. Sierravista333 00:15, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Phragmipedium popowiiBraem, Ohlund & Quéné, Richardiana 4: 185 (2004), is an accepted name (see the authoritative database : World Checklist of Monocotyledons by Kew Botanical Gardens [1] The same list equally states that P. ecuadorense Garay, Opera Bot., B 9(225: 1): 15 (1978). is a synonym of P. pearcei (Rchb.f.) Rauh & Senghas, Orchidee (Hamburg) 26: 62 (1975). JoJan 09:23, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

I read this article to figure out if Phragmipediums were epiphytic or terrestrial and read this... "Most Phragmipedium species are either terrestrial, epiphytic or lithophytic in habit." I was tempted to just edit out the most but decided to leave it to the experts to either decide whether Phrags are mostly one type or equally divided among the 3 major types.Epiphyte (talk) 02:09, 15 December 2007 (UTC)