I would like to present our next candidate - Cattleya Mareeba Tiger (C. leopoldii ‘Paul’ AM/AOS x C. schilleriana (1857) ‘SVO’ AM/AOS). C. leopoldii is synonym of C. tigrina A.Rich., 1848. C. tigrina is accepted name.

This cross has been originated and registered by E.J. Allen in 2008.

Previous Awards:

There are 13 AOS awards in OrchidPro. Latest award - clone ‘Birthday Gift’ HCC 79 pts (7 flowers on 2 inflorescences). The larger number of flowers - 17 flowers on on 1 inflorescence, clone ‘Peridot Tiger’.

Our candidate has 10 flowers on one inflorescence.

Flower Measurements:

NS H - 9.0 cm; NS V - 8.0 cm;

Dorsal Sep. W - 1.9 cm; Dorsal Sep. L - 5.7 cm;

Petal W - 2.0 cm; Petals L - 5.0 cm;

Lat/Sepal W - 1.9 cm; Lat/Sepal L - 5.2 cm;

Lip/Pouch W - 3.4 cm; Lip/Pouch L - 4.0 cm.

Judges' Comments

Christian Carrillo

I absolutely adore this flower. The color is intense and nicely saturated with a striking lip that rings of electric rose pink; the ivory pink slide lobes of the flower ads visual interest and harmoniously blends the sepals and lip. The sepals' spotting is charming and add visual dimension as well.

For me, what keeps this flower from being pointable is the presentation of the flowers. The flowers are completely jumbled together without appropriate spacing; its lacks a harmonious effect. I would like to see flowers that present themselves around the inflorescence. It also appears that, while holding a good flower count, it seems to be indoor grown since all the flowers face the same direction and are not spaced nicely around the inflorescence. Its current presentation bends some dorsals, twists some flowers sideways, pinches some petals, and distorts a lip or two.

So while this flower has the true potential to be awarded an AM, I would firmly pass on pointing it right now. I would recommend the grower find a better location to grow the plant that receives multidirectional light.

Al Messina

Ten beautifully colored flowers of about average size on one staked inflorescence. Arrangement defect along what appears to be the posterior aspect of the inflorescence betrays a likely late staking. Condition of plant suspect--brown discolor of multiple roots and multiple powder-like spots not desirable for judging.

Recommend return on next bloom with judicious staking and grooming and mid level HCC likely.

Thanks for allowing me to participate.

Carrie Buchman

The skirt of this lip is a beautiful color and the faint white picotee and lighter side lobes highlight to its color. The petals are narrower than the awarded plants of this hybrid and a bit more “twisty” and asymmetrically so. It’s floriferous is average compared to the awarded AMs and the flowers seem to be a bit crowded. I would pass on this plant.

Cathy Higgins

MAJC has had the pleasure in the past few years of seeing several examples of hybrids using bifoliate parents, most notably the famous C. Allen Condo and last winter C. Raspberry Smoke. To be awardable, the flower shape has to be good and the presentation on the spike almost perfect. Few of the photos of C. Mareeba Tiger in OrchidPro show the full 360 degree spike, but we can see on this week's candidate that the flowers do not fully surround the spike, that some of the flowers are crowded, and that the flower shape (when not crowded) is less than ideal. It's hard to judge comparative color from photos, so I'll pass on that attribute here. But based on my assessment above, no nomination, no award.

The plant looks like it has been neglected. As Ty reminded us last week, every flower award is a culture award. Proper culture might produce a different outcome in the future.

Bob Winkley

Hi Sergey -

Thanks again for creating this opportunity for interaction and education.

As I look at the candidate the first thing that comes to mind is that we have a lovely primary hybrid in front of us that combines two Brazilian bifoliate Cattleya species with similar growth habit and overall open or "starry" conformation of the flower. Some of the biggest differences between the species can be found in the coloration (best C. tigrina clones are highly colored and lacquered whereas the markings on C. schilleriana are much more apparent because of color contrast with lighter base color), conformation of the segments (C. schilleriana seems to have a flatter and potentially wider midlobe while C. tigrina's midlobe often recurves at the margins; the petals and sepals of C. tigrina seem to maintain their width all the way to their base while C. schilleriana is pinched at the base and often recurved a bit along the margins), size (C. schilleriana appears to routinely be larger), and flower count per inflorescence (C. tigrina seems to really shine here with some awarded plants sporting upwards of 28 flowers on the inflorescence whereas C. schilleriana seems to max out around 5.)

Overall, I think the awarded clones of this hybrid combine many of the nicer aspects of both species though many seem to favor C. tigrina in size, coloration, and conformation. The candidate plant has many of the good aspects found in the awarded clones. I especially like the coloration, markings, and lacquer of the flowers, and the flower count is right up there. The lips are broad, midlobes flat, and even though the color does not come up around the side lobes (which cover the column as they should) I find the contrast most pleasing. The arrangement of the flowers on the inflorescence appears to be a bit crowded but that may be the result of them having arranged themselves primarily along one side of the inflorescence. For me, the biggest challenges this flower faces on the judging table are it's forward-canting petals which are recurved at the base and almost lanceolate at the apices, accentuating the fact that they are on the narrow side for this hybrid, as well as the dorsal sepal which again is heavily recurved at its apex.

All in all, I would not nominate this plant for a flower award on this flowering since I do not think the overall form is of award quality.

Bob Winkley

Mark Werther

Sergey: I was surprised to see that registration did not happen until the 21st century.

The ten flower inflorescence tight grouping takes totally after the tigrina and did not inherent the fewer flowered and greater separation traits of the schilleriana. It could be said that we are looking at tigrina with little improvement. So why score it?

After thinking about one of the Judges' benchmarks of IMPROVEMENT, I do not think that the presentation is much or any improvement. However, at times the Judges need to recognize beauty and the necessity to award fine cultivars and suspend some of the ADVANCEMENT rules. In all the years at SEPOS I do not think I saw a tigrina of this quality. This may be a regional problem, as I believe more examples would be seen in the warmer southern state Centers.

We also have the responsibility to recognize and encourage the growers that enter their plants for judging. So one could say the flowers should have some of the characteristics of the C. schilleriana lip for a more interesting flower and not award or one could recognize the patterning, form, luster, intense coloration and well presented non-reflexed lips as pluses. I could score the inflorescence with some trepidation based on three photos, but not the fourth. It could attain a higher score with better flower separation and inclusion of C. schilleriana lip characteristics.

Mark Werther

Beth Davis

C. Mareeba Tiger

Nicely bloomed plant. It is holding it's own with many of the measurements from the awarded flowers. Striking lip color and the sharp contract from the rosy blushed side-lobes that enclose the column and the hot fuchsia mid-lobe is appealing. I would like to see the petals fuller and sepals and petals a little flatter. The petal margins should be undulated but there is an undesirable amount of recurve in the sepals and petals. The photograph of the entire inflorescence is impressive. The flowers are slightly crowded but from looking at the photo only, it does not distract from the presentation. Bi-foliate cattleyas tend to bloom in a cluster.

Happy Growing!

Beth

Laura Newton

Hello Sergey,

For the C. Mareeba Tiger:

This flower shows rich, saturated, glossy color, a nicely shaped and colored midlobe of the lip with pleasantly contrasting side lobes. The lateral sepals are quite broad.

The inflorescence is really crowded and not pleasingly arranged. The flower size is on the smaller end and the petals are pretty narrow, not only does the dorsal sepal recurve apically, but is also appears to be turned slightly off center.

Given the size, poor arrangement and narrower dorsal sepal and petals, I would not nominate it for judging from what I can see in the photos, but it has glorious color and a nice lip

Deb Bodei

Hi Sergey,

Here is my commentary.

General Observations:

First impression is that blooms are crowded, making it hard to distinguish individual bloom features.

Specific Considerations

- With one inflorescence, a flower award was considered.

- Color and texture are among the best features of the flower. When viewing a single bloom, the lip is presented nicely against the deep chocolate color of the other segments and further accentuated by the shiny texture.

- Form of sepals the petals are not as good in comparison the prior awarded, however the lip form is very good with uniform ruffling and no twisting in the center lobe

- Segment measurements are smaller across the board, except for the lip

Recommendation for nomination:

I would not recommend this plant for an award based on this flowering and presentation. Even though there were several good qualities led by the lip, it did not score high enough to award when considering all criteria.

Thank you for considering my recommendation,

Deb

Sergey Skoropad

My comments on cattleya Mareeba Tiger:

When I look at the first image, I can say - Wow, such a beautiful color! Very nice contact between lip and other parts of the flower. Ten flowers make very impressive display.

But when I look more, other images showed that distribution the flowers is not so nice. They are crowded, didn’t go around inflorescence 360.

Petals looks little narrow too.

There are 13 awards on C. Mareeba Tiger, many from 2017-2019. Most of them show much better, wider and flatter petals (except few early awards). Presentation of awarded flowers in most of the cases looks better too (difficult to judge by award photos, especially when we have only one picture).

I think the most impressive part of the flower is the beautiful, richly colored lip.

Size of the flowers doesn’t bother me, except petals W. I prefect to see 10 flowers even little smaller than 6 larger flowers. But presentation of the flowers in this type (bifoliate cattleyas) is very important.

If I judge only by first image I probably will score this plant in HCC range (77-78).

Great advantage that we have multiple photos, Including from the top (I wish to see similar in OrchidPro!).

I believe that this plant sooner or later will produce award quality flowers! Just need time! And some work to stake inflorescence on time and create beautiful display of this beautifully colored flowers!

Thanks

Sergey

John Sullivan

I like this flower. It appears to have good symmetry. In addition, the lip has a bright fuchsia color and good shape. Several of the awarded ones have a dark purple lip. I find the color of our candidate’s lip to be a more pleasing contrast to the rest of the flower. However, the flower is smaller in nearly all aspects than the others. I would probably not nominate the plant for a quality award at this time, but would hope to see size improvement later.

Exhibitor - David and Joan Rosenfeld, NJ