Dactylorhiza- white wanted plus debate on naming

[goofy]

hello Göte,
tks for that interesting link.

as a conclusion I think, the guy is right 

cheers

[fredg]

If you disagree with the thesis I am sure Stålberg would be delighted to be corrected.   
I suggest that you study the thesis. It is in English and available on: http://lup.lub.lu.se/luur/download?func=downloadFile&fileOId=1176457

Of course I disagree with Stålberg.

1. I agree with Soó, Dactylorhiza fuchsii is a seperate species, I like the Marches he wrote in the USA too
2. The thesis is not in English it's in Botanese, they have to do something to justify the time spent at university.
3. Agreeing would deprive Britain of an orchid species and we have few enough already.

[Lesley Cox]

Certainly I'm not able to take part in any botanical argument here but I bought DD. maculata and fuchsii as separate species, in the UK in 1981. Later I read that fuchsii was now to be considered a subspecies of maculata. In my plants, ssp. fuchsii is shorter, has paler pink flowers and narrower foliage. The spotting is paler too.

[gote]

Certainly I'm not able to take part in any botanical argument here but I bought DD. maculata and fuchsii as separate species, in the UK in 1981. Later I read that fuchsii was now to be considered a subspecies of maculata. In my plants, ssp. fuchsii is shorter, has paler pink flowers and narrower foliage. The spotting is paler too.

The funny thing is that in my area (where ssp. maculata is endemic and ssp. fuchsii not) maculata is only half size of fuchsii - on the other hand, some 100 km from here, I once found what probably was ssp maculata (this was pre-Soó days) that were "full size". The local maculatas are usually paler than the fuchsiis I have got from various sources - none being so dark as the ones in the posts here. All mine seem to have the same shade on the spots. personally I go for the shape of the bottom leaf when I make the distinction.
The Swedish floras say that ssp. fuchsii is only found in limestone areas but mine grow knee high in a low pH bed - another case of the difference between what plants do in the wild and in a garden situation.
Cheers
Göte
 
 

[Maren]

If this is of any help , the International Plant Name Index maintained by the Royal Botanic Gardens Kew, has lots of entries for Dactylorhiza maculata, none of them ssp. fuchsii.
http://www.ipni.org/ipni/advPlantNameSearch.do;jsessionid=D28573E3F2C7F6A04FF59EA46B2DB601?find_family=&find_genus=dactylorhiza&find_species=maculata&find_infrafamily=&find_infragenus=&find_infraspecies=&find_authorAbbrev=&find_includePublicationAuthors=on&find_includePublicationAuthors=off&find_includeBasionymAuthors=on&find_includeBasionymAuthors=off&find_publicationTitle=&find_isAPNIRecord=on&find_isAPNIRecord=false&find_isGCIRecord=on&find_isGCIRecord=false&find_isIKRecord=on&find_isIKRecord=false&find_rankToReturn=all&output_format=normal&find_sortByFamily=on&find_sortByFamily=off&query_type=by_query&back_page=plantsearch

There are also lots of entries for Dactylorhiza fuchsii, none of them with ssp. maculata.

There is, however, Dactylorhiza majalis ( Rchb.  ) P.F.Hunt  &  Summerh.  f. maculata ( Thielens ) Soó
Acta Bot. Acad. Sci. Hung. 16(3-4): 368. 1971 [1970 publ. 1971].

[goofy]

.......... the International Plant Name Index maintained by the Royal Botanic Gardens Kew, has lots of entries for Dactylorhiza maculata, none of them ssp. fuchsii.
http://www.ipni.org/ipni/advPlantNameSearch.do;jsessionid=D28573E3F2C7F6A04FF59EA46B2DB601?find_family=&find_genus=dactylorhiza&find_species=maculata&find_infrafamily=&find_infragenus=&find_infraspecies=&find_authorAbbrev=&find_includePublicationAuthors=on&find_includePublicationAuthors=off&find_includeBasionymAuthors=on&find_includeBasionymAuthors=off&find_publicationTitle=&find_isAPNIRecord=on&find_isAPNIRecord=false&find_isGCIRecord=on&find_isGCIRecord=false&find_isIKRecord=on&find_isIKRecord=false&find_rankToReturn=all&output_format=normal&find_sortByFamily=on&find_sortByFamily=off&query_type=by_query&back_page=plantsearch

There are also lots of entries for Dactylorhiza fuchsii, none of them with ssp. maculata.

There is, however, Dactylorhiza majalis ( Rchb.  ) P.F.Hunt  &  Summerh.  f. maculata ( Thielens ) Soó
Acta Bot. Acad. Sci. Hung. 16(3-4): 368. 1971 [1970 publ. 1971].

hey, what can we learn by this ?

RHS is always right 

but sometimes we are too arrogant to note,
that things can change...........

cheers

[winwen]

The distinction of D. maculata and D. fuchsii (or D. maculata ssp. maculata and D. maculata ssp. fuchsii) has already been discussed for more than 30 years. Because of the adaptability of both to different habitats I think, that from a gardeners point of view this distinction is only of academic interest. DNA-analysis also has not made things clear.

Nevertheless -since we have been spending our summer holidays in Sweden for nearly 15 years- I find Stahlbergs thesis very very interesting. The things he reports from the swedish populations of Dactylorhiza maculata ssp. fuchsii and ssp. maculata (that they are very similar in growth and may mainly be distinct by their growing places) can easily be seen there. My favourite criterion for distinguishing ssp. maculata and ssp. fuchsii is the structure of the lip. In nearly all swedish Dactylorhiza maculata, the lip is fairly intermediate between ssp. maculata and ssp. fuchsii (possibly nearer to ssp. maculata) but they are growing in completely different habitats.

Personally I think that all of these are D. maculata with more or less regional differences.