M»y 14, 18S5. ] 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER 
391 
gardens as acuminata), &c. Numerous crosses have been effected both 
ways, and capsules have been produced, but the seed has always proved 
barren. Lrelia anceps appears to be an exception, for it seeds freely 
whether crossed with a Cattleya or with any of the Brazilian Lselias. 
The period from the germinating of the seed to the appearance of the 
first flower varies immensely in the different crosses, thus Laelia trioph- 
thalma raised from seed sown in 1875 flowered in 1883, this is the shortest 
period known to us; Laelia callistoglossa from seed sown in 1858 flowered 
for the first time in 1877, or nineteen years, this is the longest period 
known ; the other have taken periods that may be said to average from 
ten to twelve years. 
Among Cypripeds some very curious facts have been elicited through 
muling. Thus, the East Indian species cross freely with each other, and 
a numerous progeny has resulted therefrom. The South American 
species, the Selenipedia, as they are called, also cross freely with each 
other, and many new forms have been obtained. The hybrids in both 
sections flower within a few years from the seed being sown. But in the 
case of the crossing of Indian with South American species the process 
has been much slower in producing results. An infinitely smaller per¬ 
centage of the seed germinates, and those seedlings that survive are so 
slow at arriving at the flowering stage, that up to the present time not a 
single plant has produced a flower, although the plants continue strong 
and healthy in appearance and increase in size every year. One thing is 
certain, the three-celled ovary of the Selenipeds offers no impediment to 
fertilisation by the pollinia of Cypripeds with a one-celled ovary, for we 
ave plants raised from C. caudatum x C. barbatum, and many other 
like crosses between other species have yielded seed. 
Cypripedium Sedeni was a remarkable cross in many respects ; it was 
in fact raised from two crosses, C. Schlimi x C. longifolium, and the 
same two vice versa,. It will be observed that in this case one of the 
parents, C. longifolium, is much more robust in habit and growth than 
the other parent C. Schlimi. [Plants of C. longifolium, C. Schlimi, and 
C, Sedeni were here shown.] No perceptible difference was observed 
between the plants raised from the two separate crosses, they agreed in 
habit, foliage, colour of flower, in fact in every particular. No such 
similar result has been obtained by us among Cypripeds. A vice versa 
cross between the same two species produces seedlings that vary more or 
less from those produced from the first cross. Thus C. tessellatum re¬ 
sulted from C. barbatum x C. concilor, and C. tessellatum porphyrium 
from C. concolor x C. barbatum. We have also an instance of two 
Fig. 92.—Cattleya, 9 months. Fig. 93.—Cattleya, 12 months. 
recognised species each being crossed by a third, hut both crosses pro¬ 
ducing like results; thus C. longifolium X C. Schlimi, and C. Roezli x 
C. Schlimi produced seedlings whose flowers are undistinguishable from 
each other ; although, as m : ght be expected, the foliage of the C. Roezli 
progeny is like, that of its parents, the more robust of the two ; hence the 
specific rank of C. Roezli is very questionable. 
Not only do recognised species of each section, East Indian and 
South American, cross freely inter se, but the hybrids also cross freely 
with them. The beautiful C. cenanthum superhum has for its parents 
C. Harrisianum, itself a hybrid, and C. insigne Maulei. As regards the 
habit and foliage of hybrid Cypripeds, the progeny usually tak s a 
form intermediate between the two parents, but sometimes it is more 
robust than either. [Plants of C. grande and its parents were shown.] 
Large as is the field offered by the great genu3 Dendrobium for the 
operations of the hybridist, comparatively little has yet been effected. 
Dominy raised the hybrid that bears his name many years ago in our 
Exeter nursery. It was followed some years later by D. Ainsworthi, 
which appeared in Dr. Ainsworth’s collection at Manchester in 1874. 
Plants of the same cross raised by West having appeared about the same 
time in the Fairfield nursery, near Manchester, and later, in the collection 
of Mr. Brymer at Dorchester by another operator, the parents being 
D. aureum x D. nobile. Subsequently Seden raised D. splendidissimum 
from the same cross, and still later Mr. Swan obtained D. Leechianum 
from D. nobile X D. aureum or the vice versa of the others. The seedlings 
raised from all the crosses are found to he variable ; members of one 
progeny approaching so closely varieties among the others, that the 
original distinctions set up between them cease to be appreciable, but 
without egotism I venture to claim for splendidissimum larger flowers 
with more substance in sepals and petals, caused probably through our 
having hybridised finer varieties of the two parents. Nevertheless, to 
avoid confusion, the progenies should, I think, to use an academical ex¬ 
pression, be bracketed. 
Of the eight hybrid Dendrobes that have already flowered D. nobile is 
one parent of five, and D. aureum of three of the same five, and of one 
other, so that only two—D. micans and D. rhodostoma—have yet flowered 
that have a parentage in which neither nobile nor aureum participated. 
Crosses between species of Phalsenopsis have been effected by several 
operators, and capsules readily obtained. We only know, however, of 
three instances besides our own where seedlings were raised ; the first by 
Dodds, in 1868, in the collection of Sir John Greville Smyth, at Ashton 
Court, near Bristol, but they were afterwards lost ; then Grey, gardener 
to the eminent orchidologist, Mr. Corning of Albany, New York, raised 
some seedlings, hut they, too, were afterwards lost ; and, lastly, Mr. 
Hollington, at Enfield, who has, I believe, one seedling still living. Our 
own experience with Phalasnopsis dates from 1875. Our first cross was 
between P. grandiflora and P. Schilleriana, but with that and with several 
succeeding crosses no results beyond the capsules were obtained. The first 
capsule to yield seedlings was gathered from P. grandiflora x P. rosea ; a 
few of these are still living. Then we obtained a few from P. amabilis 
and P. rosea, which grew with more vigour than their elder brethren, and 
may not improbably flower within the next two years. Still later we 
obtained seedlings from P. Schilleriana X P. rosea, P. grandiflora x P. 
Luddemanniana, and from two or three other crosses. 
Calanthe has probably received attention from more operators than 
any other genus in the great Orchidean family, a circumstance that can 
be best accounted for by results being obtainable in a shorter period than 
from any other genus. It may be that Calanthe being more terrestrial 
than epiphytal, there is a predisposition to earlier maturity. The capsule 
of Calanthe usually ripens in three to four months, and the seed takes 
from two to three months more 
to germinate. The seedlings 
under favourable circumstances 
will flower in the third or fourth 
year ; hence it happened that, 
although seedling Cattlevas 
were in existence before seed¬ 
ling Calanthes, the first hybrid 
Orchid to flower was a 
Calanthe. Calanthe Yeitchi 
flowered for the first time in 
1859, and was at that time 
believed to be a true bigeneric 
cross; but such it cannot be 
now regarded, as Mr. Bentham, 
in the “ Genera Plantarum,” 
has referred the pollen parent 
Limatodes rosea to Calanthe. 
Not so, however, is Phaius 
irroratus, raised by Dominy 
from P. grandifolius x Ca¬ 
lanthe nivalis, and P. irroratus 
purpureus, raised by Seden 
from P. grandifolius x Calanthe 
vestita rubro-maculata, and a third progeny that has not yet flowered, 
which was obtained by the last-named bybridiser from Phaius grandifolius 
and Calanthe Yeitchi. These are entitled to be called bigeneric crosses. 
In one of the cases only a single plant was raised, and in each of the 
other two the number was very restricted. It is a curious fact, too, that 
in habit, aspect, and in other respects the progeny is well nigh inter¬ 
mediate between two parents, being neither evergreen like Phaius, nor 
deciduous like Calanthe. 
Masdevallias were taken in hand at an early date, but failures were 
frequent, caused probably by the fact that Masdevallia, as a genus, is far 
more heterogenous than was at first supposed, whence a mixture of the 
different sections may not possibly be effected. M. Chelsoni was at 
length raised from M. amabilis x M. Veitchiana ; then M. Fraseri from 
M. ignea x M. Lindeni by Mr. Fraser of Derncleugh, Aberdeen : but the 
seedlings were reared by us ; and lastly, M. Gairiana from M. Veitch¬ 
iana x M. Davisi. Capsules have been obtained from M. Veitchiana x 
M. infracta, M. polysticta x M. tovarensis, M. Harryana x M. Veitch¬ 
iana, and a few others, but all attempts to intermix M. chimacra and its 
allies with the brilliant-flowered species have proved fruitless. 
Great as is the difficulty of raising seedlings from Orchids requiring a 
high temperature for their cultivation, it is still greater in the case of 
those that receive “ cool treatment,” if we except Masdevallia. Odonto- 
glossum affords a striking instance of this, paradoxical as it may seem, 
especially as so many undoubted natural hybrids between different species 
of this genus have appeared among the importations of the last ten years. 
Numerous crosses between various species, both Mexican and New 
Granadian, have been effected, and capsules with apparently good seed 
have been produced, but with the utmost care that could be bestowed no 
progeny has yet been raised. Mr. Cookson of Newcastle has, indeed, 
stated in The Garden of February 10th, 1883, that he succeeded in raising 
a fine lot of Odontoglossum seedlings, of which the pollen parent was 
0. crispum and the seed parent either 0. gloriosum or 0. Uro-Skinneri, 
Fig. 94.—Cattleya, 16 months. 
