Bulbophyllum putidum
Submitted by wellsy on Mon, 21/04/2008 - 18:16
Bulbophyllum putidum (Teijsm. & Binn.) J.J.Sm., Bull. Jard. Bot. Buitenzorg, II, 8: 27 (1912).
Distribution: Java
Originally submitted as Bulbophyllum ornatissimum. Name edit as per below discussion (see comments section under the photos).
Included here is a very enlightening comment which clears up quite a bit of confusion. (Thanks must go to Bernard)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We have had identification problems with Bulbophyllums... putidum, appendiculatum and ornatissimum for many years. Garay Hamer and Seigerest compounded the problem in 1993 when they introduced the genus Mastigion, at the same time they re-named B. putidum to Mastigion appendiculatum, making it the type of the new genus (which was never really accepted by many Botanical Institutions). Both B. putidum and B. appendiculatum are accepted names in the Botanical Register. I visited the Lindley Library at the RHS London several years ago and recorded the original descriptions of these three species. Part of the problem with B. ornatissimum is Reichenbach's very general description in 'The Gardeners Chronicle' dated September 30th 1872. Hence the confusion with B. putidum and B. ornatissimum. The same confusion exist between B. putidum and B. appendiculatum and until we find either B. ornatissimum or B. appendiculatum the problem will stay as at present.
There was a scientific paper issued in 1999 entitled " An Enumeration of Orchid Collections from the Kelabit Highlands" (Borneo) by three or four well known scientists, which mentions B. putidum. This species is also mentioned in " The Orchids of Peninsular Malaysia and Singapore" 1992 authors, Gunner Seidenfaden and JJ Wood of Kew, a colour image is also shown. Another reference can be found in "The Orchids of Thailand" A Preliminary List By G. Seidenfaden and Tem Smitinand 1961. There is also an interesting article in the Australian Orchid Review by David Banks June/July issue 2003. I don't agree with some of D. Banks observations on B. appendiculatum, but reading his article will give you some idea of the confusion surrounding these three species.
Finally, I believe that your picture is the bonafide genuine article. ie: Bulbophyllum putidum
Regards
bernabu
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think I need help!
I am confused with the identification of this species.
It has always been labelled as Bulbophyllum ornatissimum but there was also a reference to Bulbophyllum putidum on the tag. Just now I was doing some other sorting out of some stuff here in the Bulbophyllum area and noted that the photo of Bulbophyllum putidum ( http://www.orchidsonline.com.au/node/1574 ) looks very similar. I did some searching around on the net and my confusion was only deepened. I think I need some help with this one!
Regards wellsy
B.ornatissimum-putidum.
Hi wellsy, This is definitely B.putidum. B. ornatissimum has not been seen in collections for many many years. But I may have found an herbarium with a plant that they have had for many years, a friend of mine who knows I have been searching a long long time for this species, has seen the plant and the records together with letters of confirmation from Kew (dated 1895). We may have access when it next flowers. One of the problems with identification of ornatissimum is that a few nurseries in America still insist in naming putidum as ornatissimim. Indeed, Pradham in his book on Indian Orchids, also insist on the incorrect name of ornatissimum for putidum and he actually shows a picture of putidum entitled ornatissimum in his book. I have met him and spoken personally about this problem, but he won't change his mind.
Regards
bernabu
bernabu
Ta Bernard
Ta Bernard...thanks for clarifying that. I'll re-label all my plants accordingly and this post!
PS: Not only US nurseries Bernard....aussie ones as well!
Regards wellsy
conservation minded nurseries
this plant should be pollinated as well and resulting seed dispersed to some conservation minded nurseries bernard.
Also...do you have access to a bonafide photo of this species?
Regards wellsy
putidum
We have had identification problems with Bulbophyllums... putidum, appendiculatum and ornatissimum for many years. Garay Hamer and Seigerest compounded the problem in 1993 when they introduced the genus Mastigion, at the same time they re-named B.putidum to Mastigion appendiculatum, making it the type of the new genus (which was never really accepted by many Botanical Institutions). Both B.putidum and B.appendiculatum are accepted names in the Botanical Register. I visited the Lindley Library at the RHS London several years ago and recorded the original descriptions of these three species. Part of the problem with B.ornatissimum is Reichenbach's very general description in 'The Gardeners Chronicle' dated September 30th 1872. Hence the confusion with B.putidum and ornatissimum. The same confusion exist between putidum and appendiculatum and until we find either ornatissimum or appendiculatum the problem will stay as at present.
There was a scientific paper issued in 1999 entitled " An Enumeration of Orchid Collections from the Kelabit Highlands" (Borneo)by three or four well known scientists, which mentions B.putidum. This species is also mentioned in " The Orchids of Peninsular Malaysia and Singapore" 1992 authors, Gunner Seidenfaden and JJ Wood of Kew, a colour image is also shown. Another reference can be found in "The Orchids of Thailand" A Preliminary List By G. Seidenfaden and Tem Smitinand 1961. There is also an interesting article in the Australian Orchid Review by David Banks June/July issue 2003. I don't agree with some of D.Banks observations on B.appendiculatum, but reading his article will give you some idea of the confusion surrounding these three species.
Finally, I beleive that your picture is the bonafide genuine article.
Regards
bernabu
excellent Bernard!
excellent Bernard!
I have incorporated this comment (in it's entirety) in the actual entry for Bulbophyllum putidum as it is just so worthwhile to have close by the other text and the photo. I hope you approve?
Regards wellsy
Gene Symonds Orchid
Check out the "tongue" in the second image, that's DEFINITELY a GENE SYMONDS ORCHID !!!!!!! ;o))))
For those on another planet, Gene Symonds is in the band KISS and has an extraordinarily long tongue.
Couldn't help but see the resemblance.
Sad, I know, but, there you go.
Anton
LOL-yes indeed
I had not really looked at it that way before....but now that you mention it...and yes having lived through (and vaguely remembering) the 70's I do know Gene Symonds and Kiss.
It is also a very mobile tongue Anton. I have personally observed flies landing on the 'tongue' (well lip) and much to their surprise they were immediately transported quite a number of degrees to be smashed unceremoniously onto the column. A very memorable sight for me I can tell you!
This species regularly becomes pollinated in my shadehouse in this way!
PS: I have tried to photograph the pollination in the past...I should have another go!
Regards wellsy
Pollination
Maybe video ?
If you don't have a camera, what about your mobile ?
would love to see it.
Anton
great idea!
Anton thats a a great idea!
I'll keep an eye out and my trusty phone handy.
Regards wellsy
Need Help--Bulbophyllum putidum
I have been reading this thread and I just bought a Bulbophyllum putidum but the foilage on my plant has a lightly mottled appearance (plant is healthy), but the photo pic of the plant in this thread does not looks like it does not have mottled leaves. I am adding a link to a photo of my plant. Also, one bulb has 2 leaves.
http://i120.photobucket.com/albums/o194/plf789/bulbputidum2-2.jpg
Any help or comments would be appreciated
Luci
closer look
Hi Luci,
I am a little suspicious of the look of this plant. I don't want to panic you but the plant just doesn't look right to me. I would be keeping it away from my other plants for a while at least.
Can you post a larger image so I can have a closer look please?
Regards wellsy
B.putidum
Hi Luci,
I agree with wellsy's observations. The plant has very recently been placed on a fresh piece of cork bark with far too much spaghnum moss. The leaves look as though they have had some sort of virus or bacterial infection, or possibly some bug damage. (Or it might be a cross with a different species whith mottled leaves). Even the new bulb and leaf growing at the bottom of your plant looks to have the same problem. I think most orchid growers have had a similar experience when purchasing new plants.
If it is diseased don't be disheartened, you may be able to resolve the problem. If it was my plant, I would remove it from the bark, take a clean pot with some fairly loose spaghnum moss at the bottom then rest your plant on the top of the moss (the roots do not need to be covered at this stage). Then isolate the pot in a position with light shade and good air movement, depending on temperatures give a very light spray when necessary (just enough so that the spaghnum stays light and airy and does'nt compact).
Keep the plant under observation and when it perks-up you will then be able to re-mount it using
the least amount of spag as possible, the secret to mounting plants is to make sure that it is firmly attached to the mount and that the roots are allowed to roam and are not smothered with too much moss, which will kill the roots.
hope this helps
bernabu
Bulb. putidum
These pictures are larger so maybe it will help. The plant leaves seem to be very healthy and the mottled appearance is not like anything is wrong with the plant just the color of the leaves..sort of like the leaves of a Paph. The light areas look more yellow in the picture they are actually light green. Is there any Bubophyllums that have mottled leaves that you know of? Maybe this is not putidum??
http://i120.photobucket.com/albums/o194/plf789/Bulbputidum22.jpg
http://i120.photobucket.com/albums/o194/plf789/Bulbputidum23.jpg
Thank you
Luci
it looks bad to me
Hey Luci it looks bad to me unfortunately. Do as Bernard advises and see how you go.
Stop watering is the most important thing to do straight away I believe. I have had plants which looked like this one that VERY quickly lost ALL leaves and next minute they are in a better place.
Regards wellsy
could be
Hi Luci,with closer inspection of your new images, I am tempted to say that the discolouration on the leaves and with one of the bulbs having two leaves,(which is somewhat unusual especially with this species) that this could be caused by some chemical application perhaps when it was part of a larger plant.
Yes there are a few species from the Bulbophyllum alliance with spotted or speckled leaves.
bernabu
crop
I have done a crop of Luci's photo to emphasise my point here.
Note the very brown psuedobulbs Bernard....top...small glimpse and bottom better look.
Sorry but it looks bad to me. If you can post a detail of the plant zooming as close to the bulbs as possible after removing the sphag could clinch it for us Luci.
Regards wellsy
remain to be convinced
that this plant is in a terminal state. The fact that it has produced a new growth is encouraging.
It is normal for bulbs to shrivel on such a small plant when producing new bulbs. What is required at this stage is to get some strength in the plant. I will post an image of two seedlings which I gave the treatment to which I previously prescribed to. If you prefer to leave the plant in it's current state, I would suggest that you are very careful with the watering regime.
bernabu
Close up of pbulbs
sorry about the size of image but it was the only way I could get good detail for you to see. On the double leafed bulb..the brown you see is the covering over the bulb. Taking these close ups and looking at them I think you both are right about the health. Also on the tag it states: Mastigion putidum (syn. fascinator). I didn't think these two were the same.
http://i120.photobucket.com/albums/o194/plf789/pbulb1.jpg
http://i120.photobucket.com/albums/o194/plf789/pbulb2.jpg
http://i120.photobucket.com/albums/o194/plf789/pbulb3.jpg
http://i120.photobucket.com/albums/o194/plf789/pbulb5.jpg
Thank you again for your help
Two plants
When I took it off the mount there were two plants (div.) mounted together.
more to go by
These photos give us a great deal more to go by.
It's not as bad as I thought in some respects but you can see now that the bulbs are looking a little shrivelled and distressed. I think that being two bulb divisions and being covered in sphag has been a little bit too much for them.
I wonder did the seller do this to disguise the fact that they were two bulb divisions? Minimum 4 bulb divisions are what I aim for when dividing Bulbos.
In any case getting rid of the sphag and remounting them may be successful.
Regards wellsy
interesting
Luci, it will be interesting to see what the supposed two-leaved Bulbophyllum turns out to be.
But the fact that you have two seperate plants with the same leaf markings, confirms my suspicions with regards to chemical application. Good luck with the B.putidum.
Regards
bernabu
Isolated
I have it isolated and in shady area and will water sparingly as everyone said. Yes it might be interesting if I can get it to live.
I appreciate the help. I have only grown orchids for approximately 1 1/2 yrs. This is my first attempt at Bulbophyllums.
I am also new to this forum. Forums such as this with people who do not get irritated at all the newbie questions or cries for help are an assest.
Thank you all,
Luci
fairly forgiving
Don't give up on Bulbophyllums if the worst should happen to this one. They are in general fairly forgiving and tend to grow extremely well if you can provide them with the conditions they like.
I am sure I speak for us all in saying that we are glad to hear you are happy with the help you have found here on Orchids Online.
Regards wellsy