march 2000 north american native orchid journal

NORTH AMERICAN NATIVE ORCHID JOURNAL

______________________________________ Volume 6 March Number 1 2000

a quarterly devoted to the orchids of North America published by the

NORTH AMERICAN NATIVE ORCHID ALLIANCE

* * * * * * *

* * * * * * * IN THIS ISSUE: SCHIEDEELLA ARIZONICA: A NEW SPECIES FROM THE SOUTHWESTERN UNITED STATES IN ANTICIPATION OF THE GROWING SEASON A SHORT HISTORY OF THE GENUS CYPRIPEDIUM RARE, THREATENED AND ENDANGERED ORCHIDS IN NORTH AMERICA - Part 1��.and more!

NORTH AMERICAN NATIVE

ORCHID JOURNAL (ISSN 1084-7332)

published quarterly in March June September December

by the NORTH AMERICAN NATIVE ORCHID ALLIANCE a group dedicated to the conservation and promotion of our

native orchids

Editor: Paul Martin Brown

Assistant Editor: Nathaniel E. Conard Editorial & Production Assistants:

Philip E. Keenan Stan Folsom Nancy Webb

The Journal welcomes articles, of any length, of both a scientific and general interest nature relating to the orchids of North America. Scientific articles should conform to guidelines such as those in Lindleyana or Rhodora. General interest articles and notes may be more informal. Authors may include line drawings and/or black and white photographs. Color inserts may be arranged. Please send all inquiries or material for publication to the Editor at PO Box 772121, Ocala, FL 34477-2121 (late May - early Oct. Box 759, Acton, ME 04001-0759). 2000 Membership in the North American Native Orchid Alliance, which includes a subscription to the Journal, is $26 per year in the United States, $29US in Canada and $32US other foreign countries. Payment should be sent to Nancy A. Webb, 84 Etna St., Brighton, MA 02135-2830. Claims for lost issues or canceled memberships should be made to the editorial office within 30 days.

NORTH AMERICAN NATIVE ORCHID JOURNAL

Volume 6 March Number 1 2000

CONTENTS NOTES FROM THE EDITOR

1 SCHIEDEELLA ARIZONICA: A NEW SPECIES FROM

THE SOUTHWESTERN UNITED STATES Paul Martin Brown

with Ronald A. Coleman 3

IN ANTICIPATION OF THE GROWING SEASON The Slow Empiricist

19 OCCURRENCE OF WILD COCO, EULOPHIA ALTA

(L.) Fawcett & Rendle, AT ROCK SPRINGS RUN STATE RESERVE, ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA

Brian Emanuel, Jo Anna Watson Baber & Mike Beckwith 26

A SHORT HISTORY OF THE GENUS CYPRIPEDIUM Phillip E. Keenan

29 FOR YOUR INFORMATION!

43 RARE, THREATENED AND ENDANGERED

ORCHIDS IN NORTH AMERICA - Part 1 Anne B. Wagner, Ken Wagner & Paul Martin Brown

44 5th ANNUAL NORTH AMERICAN NATIVE ORCHID

CONFERENCE 60

RECENT TAXONOMIC AND DISTRIBUTIONAL NOTES FROM FLORIDA 5.

Paul Martin Brown 62

BOOK REVIEWS: Genera Orchidacearum Volume 1

Mark Whitten 67

Unless otherwise credited, all drawings in this issue are by Stan Folsom Color Plates:

Plate 1, page 71 - Schiedeella arizonica Plate 2, page 72 - Cypripedium acaule; Epidendrum amphistomum forma rubrifolium Plate 3, page 73 - Corallorhiza wisteriana forma rubra; Pteroglossapsis ecristata forma flava Plate 4, page 74 - Listera australis forma scottii; Listera australis forma viridis; Spiranthes xfolsomii

The opinions expressed in the Journal are those of the authors. Scientific articles may be subject to peer review and popular articles will be examined for

both accuracy and scientific content. Volume 6, number 1, pages 1-74; issued March 20, 2000.

Copyright 2000 by the North American Native Orchid Alliance, Inc. Cover: Prosthechea boothiana var. erythronioides by Stan Folsom

1

NOTES FROM THE EDITOR

With the beginning of the new century we enter our sixth year of the Journal. This issue presents the first of a four-part series on the rare, threatened and endangered orchids of North America as well as several new taxa. Research seems to be at a peak right now as there are several more new taxa to come in the June issues as well. September and December should have proceedings from the conference in Washington this summer. That is not to say that we do not need your articles and observations. They are most important and keep the Journal of interest to all.

Mailing and delivery seem to be continuing

problem and I will endeavor to send out replacement issues as quickly as I can. Stan and I (and the animals) will be leaving Florida for Maine about May 15th and then plan to drive to the conference in early July. We will be difficult to reach for most of July, but in the June issue will give you an alternate telephone number where you can at least leave an important message. Mail after May 15th should be sent to PO Box 759, Acton, Maine 04001. We plan to return to Florida in early October.

Plans for the new Wild Orchids of Florida

field guide are well underway with a signed contract

2

with the University Press of Florida and potential publication date of September 2001.

Paul Martin Brown Editor PO Box 772121 Ocala, FL 34477 352/861-2565 May 15 - October 1 PO Box 759 Acton, ME 04001 207/636-3719 [email protected]

Brown/Coleman: SCHIEDEELLA ARIZONICA

3

SCHIEDEELLA ARIZONICA: A NEW SPECIES FROM THE SOUTHWESTERN

UNITED STATES

Paul Martin Brown with Ronald A. Coleman1

This spiranthoid taxon from the southwestern United States has long been accepted as Spiranthes parasitica A. Rich. & Gal., or as Schiedeella parasitica (A. Rich. & Gal.) Schlechter, and is illustrated in Luer (1975) as such. In the years following Luer's publication both the genus Schiedeella and the species parasitica have been carefully re-examined (Burns-Balogh, 1989; Szlachetko, 1991, 1992). Continued examination of this taxon by Coleman and Brown warrants proposal of the following:

Schiedeella arizonica P.M. Brown sp. nov. (Fig. 1, 2; Pl. 1) TYPE: USA, Arizona: Pima County. Marshall Gulch. Santa Catalina Mountains. June 1906, J. J. Thornber 5563 (Holotype: ARIZ 12503) 1 All of the field work and the vast majority of the herbarium citations were initially gathered by Ron Coleman. The information was assembled and the text written by P.M. Brown.


4

(Photographs: NANOJ 2(2):127 (as S. fauci-sanguinea); 6(1):71; Luer, 1975, Nat. Orchids of the US & Can. ex Fl. pg. 129, pl. 29 as Spiranthes parasitica; Liggio, 1999, Wild Orchids of Texas pg. 157 (as Schiedeella parasitica). similis Schiedeella fauci-sanguinea (Dod) Burns-Balogh, sed divergens flora magniorum et labia 5.5-8 longa x 3.5 mm lata, apices dilatata cum labella 3-nervo viridis Similar to Schiedeella fauci-sanguinea (Dod) Burns-Balogh, but differing in larger flowers and with a lip 5.5-8 x 3.5 mm, broadest at the apex and with three prominent green lines PLANT: terrestrial herb, up to 20 cm in height, slender; ROOTS: a thickened tuber to 2 cm long; LEAVES: 3-5, deep green, petoliate, oval to 30 x 60 mm, arranged in a basal rosette, withered at anthesis; INFLORESCENSE: a slender greenish-yellow to rosy stem with to 12 whitish flowers arranged in a slender, loose, single ranked spiral, with several prominent stem bracts to 15 mm in length; FLORAL BRACT: lanceolate-acuminate, translucent white to 10 mm long; OVARY: pubescent, green, to 5 mm long; DORSAL SEPAL: oblong-obtuse, 5-7 x 1.5-2 mm. LATERAL SEPALS: oblong-oblique, obtuse, 5-7 x 2 mm; PETALS: spatulate, widest above the middle and tapering to a narrow base, 4.5-5 x 1.5 mm. LIP: oblong, 5.5-8 x 3.5 mm, constricted above the middle with the apex expanded and the margin frilled, (the outer portion strongly recurved in living material), finely pubescent, with three green stripes, center of the lip with an


5

elliptical thickened concavity which is rich cinnabar red, especially if viewed from beneath; base with poorly-defined tuberosities that clasp the green column; FRUIT: an ellipsoid capsule 7 x 4 mm. Additional specimens examined: UNITED STATES: Arizona, Cochise County: At base of rocks in moist soil, above Long Park, Chiricahua Mountains. Elevation: 9,300 feet. (Bloomed in cultivation at Tucson in February 1965). August 27, 1964, R. J. Barr 64-497 (ARIZ); On north slope east of Barfoot Park, Chiricahua Mountains. Elevation: 9,200 feet. August 11, 1965, R. J. Barr 65-301A (ARIZ); common on N slopes under Pseudotsuga above Rustler Park, Chiricahua Mountains. Elevation: 9,200 feet. August 9, 1965, R. J. Barr 65-293 (ARIZ); Chiricahua Mountains under Douglas fir, pine, aspen, just below Rustler Park; 6/4/1965, Walker s.n. (Southwest Research Station); Coronado National Forest, Pinery Canyon Rd. 1.5 miles W of Onion Saddle, oak pine forest along stream; 6/12/1987, L.R. Landrum 5504 with S.S. Landrum (ASU); Coronado National Forest. Pinery Canyon Road, 1.5 miles W of Onion Saddle, oak pine forest along stream. Ca. 6000 ft. Flowers whitish with orange-red structure. 12 June 1987, L. R. Landrum 5504 with S. S. Landrum (ARIZ); Locally common on shaded slopes in mixed conifer woodland with Abies concolor, Pseudotsuga, Quercus gambelli; Bear Canyon Trail; NE 1/4 Sec 29; T23S; R20E. Elevation 7320 feet. 9 June 1991, J. E. Bowers 3527, S. P. McLaughlin (ARIZ); Perennial along trail to Bond Spring; T23S; R20E; sec 34; with


6

Pseudotsuga menziesii, Abies concolor, Fraxinus velutina; elevation ca 8300 feet. 12 July 1992, J. E. Bowers 3683, S. P. McLaughlin (ARIZ). Graham County: Pseudotsuga-Abies concolor-Pinus strobiformis forest, lower slope, SW-16°; granite. Below road beyond Webb Peak turnoff, Pinaleno Mountains, elevation: 9,400 feet. August 16, 1962, W. A. Niering, R. H. Whittaker, stand #409 (ARIZ); above road on "L" above Hospital Flats. Pinaleno Mts, 9100'. 8/18/1958, W. A. Niering s.n. (ARIZ); Post Creek, Pinaleno Mountains (Mt. Graham) elevation: 9,000 feet. August 7, 1965, Walker s.n. (ARIZ); Mt. Graham, moist wooded ravine along road just east of turnoff for Hospital Flat Campground. 9050', 7/6/1980, C. J. Sheviak 2639 (NYS). Greenlee County: Hannagan Meadows. July 15, 1964, Margaret Schmidt 31; Det. by Carl Sager-1970. (ARIZ); Apache National Forest, Rte. 666, Hannagan Campground, Spruce zone, 9000', 7/24/1973, Lehto, McGill, Nash & Pinkhava 11308 (ASU). Pima County: Catalina Mountains, deep shade north slopes in Douglas fir belt, 8500 ft. July 13, 1944, Walter S. Phillips 2403 (ARIZ); In deep shade in mixed conifer forest; along the North Slope Trail, Rincon Mountains; elevation 8000 feet. 12 June 1982, J. E. Bowers R270, S. R. McLaughlin (ARIZ). Santa Cruz County: Growing in rich leaf mold near Douglas fir, north exposure just above bottom of canyon, 100 yds up the trail above Florida Springs, Santa Rita Mountains. May 31, 1980, Jack Kaiser s.n., det. C.T. Mason (ARIZ); Santa Catalina Mountains, Marshall Gulch, Arizona. June 1907, Thornber, McDougal and Lloyd s.n. (ARIZ); Santa Catalina Mountains, Marshall Gulch,


7

16-20 June 1907, J. J. Thornber and Lloyd 4196 (AMES, US); NEW MEXICO, Grant County: Black Range at Wrights Cabin Campground, 33 miles E of Silver City. Ponderosa Pine, Douglas fir, Gambel's oak, common on shaded areas on slopes in oak litter. Up to 10" tall, scape and flowers pale pink. 6/6/1968, Hess 1975, (NMSU); Black Range, Iron Creek Recreation Area. sec. 18, T16S, R9W 7200'; 6/9/1985, Worthington 13233 (UTEP). Lincoln County: Krane Canyon. West of Alto, T10S R13E sec 31 7800'; 7/11/1977, Reggie Fletcher 2273 (UNM); Lincoln National Forest, Three Rivers west of Sierra Blance; see 36; T10S, R10E under oaks; 5/21/1984, Reggie Fletcher and S. Lucas 7618 (UNM); Sacramento (White) Mts., along Eagle Creek at junction Hwy 532 and Forest Road 127, T10S; R13E; sec 31 about 8000' elevation, N slope Douglas fir forest. 6/9/1982, Worthington 8514 (ASU); Lincoln National Forest, jct. hwy 532 and FSR 127 at Eagle Creek; T10S, R13E. sec. 31 8000'; 6/9/1982, Worthington 8514 (UTEP); White Mts., Eagle Creek Canyon, 0.4 miles NW jct. hwy 532 with Forest Rd. 127 July 1, 1984, Worthington 12201 (SEL); Otero County: Otero County, NE slope at head of Sixteen Springs Canyon, Sacramento Mtns. Todson s.n. (US); Rudiso Creek, 7500' ; 6/11/1936 Roberson and Humphrey s.n. (UNM). TEXAS, Culberson County: Guadalupe Mts., Bowl, canyon just N of Juniper trail; conifer woodland; collected by Brent Wauer. Fruit erect, brown. 22-24 Jun 1992, A. M. Powell 5866 (SRSC); Exterior lip revolute, fringed-incised, pubescent, 3-veined, pale-translucent, inside portion rectangular and red-orange across, the 3 veins evident,


8

pubescent in back throat; sepals and petals pale, semi-translucent. 13 Jun 1992, A. M. Powell 5856 (SRSC); Jeff Davis County: Davis Mts., Mt Livermore, 100 yds below Bridge Gap. Lip Whitish, Throat red-orange. 18 May 1992, Kelly Bryan s.n. (SRSC); upper Limpia Canyon, Davis Mountains, moist shaded ground along creek, 2200 m, 11 June 1926, E. J. Palmer 30786 (AMES).

The following specimens were examined and/or cited by Szlachetko and have incomplete data and were unavailable for re-examination by either Coleman or Brown. In addition there is some confusion as to the location of the Todson specimens. Szlachetko cites them from NMSU, which is Northwest Missouri State University, but in all likelihood they were from New Mexico State University, which is NMS. Due to long-term storage at NMSU and loans at NMC specimens could not be verified. ARIZONA: Cochise County, along Onion Saddle - Rustler Park Road, E slope just below ridge of Chiricahua Mts. Todson s.n. (US). NEW MEXICO: Grant County: North slope of Signal Peak, Pinos Altos Mts. 2 mi S of Redstone Cabin, Todson s.n. (NMSU); Wright Cabin Canyon, Black Range, on E facing slope Todson s.n. (NMSU); item, but ....33 mi E of Silver City on St Hwy 90, Hess 1975 (NMSU). Sierra County: North facing slope, small canyon .5 mile S of Emory Pass, Black Range Todson s.n. (NMSU); Mogollon Mts., Bearwallow Mt. E aspect of upper slope, Moir & Fitzhugh 541 (NMSU)


9

HABITAT: dry coniferous forests, hillsides and creek canyons from 6000' - 9400' elevation. RANGE: southwestern Arizona (Cochise, Graham, Greenlee, and Pima Counties); southern New Mexico (Grant, Lincoln, Otero, and Sierra Counties); western Texas (Culberson and Jeff Davis Counties). FLOWERING PERIOD: early May - early June ETYMOLOGY: arizonica after the State of Arizona where the first collection was made within the known range of the species.

Schiedeella arizonica P.M. Brown has been known, under various names, in the southwestern United States since Thornber's 1906 collection from Arizona. Thornber simply labels the collection Spirostachys a genus that appears to be unpublished. In 1938 Charles Schweinfurth annotated the specimens as Spiranthes parasitica A. Rich. & Gal. Both Correll (1950) and Luer (1975) cite this first collection in the United States and continued to use the generic name Spiranthes. Thornber collected the species again from the same area in 1907 and it was not until 1926 that Palmer collected it in Texas and eventually Roberson and Humphrey collected it in New Mexico in 1936. After that very few collections were made for nearly 50 years until more active fieldwork and orchid interest prevailed.

In 1920 Schlechter segregated several species

formerly in the genus Spiranthes into the genus


10


11

Fig. 1 continued


12

Schiedeella, found primarily in southern Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean. It was not until Garay (1980) published his exhaustive work on the Spiranthinae that Schlechter's name slowly came into general usage. Both Correll (1950) and Luer (1976) used the genus Spiranthes for all of the spiranthoid segregates. Catling (1989) published one of the earliest recent taxonomic listings that utilized Garay's treatment of the subtribe. Two of the distinguishing features of the genus Schiedeella are the linear to ovate, long-petioled leaves that are ususally absent at anthesis and that many of the species in the genus have distinctively colored nectary patches on the lip.

In 1978 Donald Dod described a new species,

Spiranthes fauci-sanguinea Dod, from the Dominican Republic. One of the most striking aspects of the flowers was the cinnabar-red patch on the lip. During the course of her study of the Spiranthinae, Pamela Burns-Balogh (1989) transferred Spiranthes fauci-sanguinea to the genus Schiedeella, stating that the specimens from the southwestern United States (Arizona, New Mexico & Texas) were also this species. Dariusz Szlachetko (1991, 1992) included in his treatments of Schiedeella the range of S. fauci-sanguinea as the Dominican Republic and southwestern United States through Mexico to Central America. His work with the type and original description of S. parasitica led to his determination that the plants previously addressed as S. parasitica from the southern portion of the range were not that species and that S. parasitica should be reduced to a variety of Schiedeella llaveana and that the range was restricted to


13

southern Mexico and Central America: Schiedeella violacea var. parasitica (A. Rich. & Gal.) Szlachetko. In 1996 Brown published a synopsis of this taxonomic history and, following both Burns-Balogh and Szlachetko noted the change in the name of the southwestern United States plants. This quickly elucidated comments from Tom Todson and Ed Greenwood to Brown and Coleman (personal communications) that they seriously doubted that the Dominican taxon was the same as the southwestern US taxon, especially considering the range of the taxa under consideration. Although Coleman and Brown both expressed interest in trying to pursue this question it was not taken up again until 1999. By then Coleman had completed exhaustive herbaria examinations of numerous specimens from the southwestern United States and both he and Brown had compared them with an isotype of S. fauci-sanguinea (US, AMES) and were satisfied that two distinctive taxa were involved. Discussions with Dod (Brown) were very helpful as Dod indicated that he also was not satisfied with Burns-Balogh's statement that the southwestern US plants were the same taxon as the Dominican plants.

Accepting Szlachetko's research that Schiedeella llaveana var. parasitica (syn. S. parasitica s.s.) is a totally different plant from the red spotted taxa, careful comparison of S. fauci-sanguinea with the southwestern US taxon resulted in the need to describe S. arizonica. Differences are numerous, and most notably in the shape of the lip and overall size of the perianth, habit of the inflorescence, and shape of the leaves (Fig. 1). Dod also, in his original description, states that S. fauci-


14

sanguinea grows from 2-4 cm tall - and plants of S. arizonica that have been examined vary from 5 - 25 cm tall (although Luer states the height to 30 cm). Although all of the current and historical sites for S. arizonica in the United States are near the Mexican border, inquiries and examinations of specimens from many herbaria have not resulted in any northern Mexican specimens. Despite Szlachetko's statement (1992) that the range of S. fauci-sanguinea is from southwestern US throughout Mexico to Central America, he does not cite any specimens from the bordering states of Sonora or Chihuahua, although he gives Chihuahua as a state in the range of S. fauci-sanguinea. Such herbaria as the University of Arizona (ARIZ) have extensive collections from northern Mexico, nevertheless much of the Mexican areas are inaccessible and the species most certainly is easily overlooked, especially if the collector is not orchid-oriented and searching for it. Acknowledgements: The authors thank Chuck Sheviak, Paul M. Catling, Donald Dod, Tom Todson, and Ed Greenwood as well as the curators and collection managers of the following herbaria for their assistance: US, AMES, NY, ARIZ, UTEP, NMC, ASU, SEL, SRSU, & NMSU. Paul Martin Brown, Research Associate, University of Florida

Herbarium, Florida Museum of Natural History, Gainesville, FL. PMB is the editor of the Journal and currently coordinates the Florida Native Orchid Project.


15

Working with Stan Folsom they are completing work on a new Field Guide to the Wild Orchids of Florida.

Ronald A. Coleman, 11520 E. Calle del Valle, Tucson AZ 85749 Ron is the author of Wild Orchids of California, and numerous articles on the native orchids of California and Arizona/New Mexico. He will be a speaker at the 5th Annual North American Native Orchid Conference in July 2000. Literature Cited: Brown, P.M.1996. Schiedeella fauci-sanguinea: a new name for an old

plant. NANOJ 2(1): 66-68. Burns-Balogh, P. 1982. Generic redefinition in the subtribe

Spiranthinae (Orchidaceae) Amer. J. of Bot. 69:1119-1132. 1986. A Synopsis of Mexican Spiranthineae. Orquidea (Mex.) 10(1): 76-96. 1989. Schiedeella dodii Burns-Balogh, a new species from the Dominican Republic. Die Orchidee 40(5): 169-173.

Catling, Paul M. 1989. Biology of North American Representatives of the subfamily Spiranthoideae in North American Native Terrestrial Orchid Propagation Conference Proceedings, Brandywine Conservancy pp. 49-67.

Coleman, R. A. 1996. Orchids of Arizona, a preliminary checklist. NANOJ 2(2): 121-129.

Correll, D. S. 1950. Native Orchids of North America, north of Mexico. Chronica Botanica, Waltham.

Dod, D. 1978. Orquideas Dominicanas Nuevas III. Moscosoa 1(3): 60-62.

Garay, L. A., 1980. A Generic Revision of the Spiranthinae. Bot. Mus. Leaf. Harv. Univ. 28(4): 278-425.

Liggio, J. & Ann Orto Liggio. 1999. Wild Orchids of Texas. University of Texas Press, 227 pp.

Luer, C. A. 1975. Native Orchids of the United States and Canada, excluding Florida. NY Botanical Garden, Bronx. 360 pp.

Schlechter, R. 1920. Versuch einer Neuordnung der Spiranthinae. Beih. Bot. Centralbl. 37(2): 317-454.


16

Szlachetko, D. L. 1991. Notes on the genera Schiedeella and Funkiella (Orchidaceae, Spiranthinae) Fragm. Flor. Geobot. 36(1): 13-21.

1992. A revision of Schiedeella. Fragm. Flor. Geobot. 37(1): 157-204.

Fig. 2 Arizona red-spot ladies-tresses

Schiedeella arizonica


17

Schiedeella arizonica left: tuberous rootstock with (1) leaf petiole and (2) developing flower stem below: rosette of leaves; the petiole are not evident in the leaf litter Photos by Ronald A. Coleman

Empiricist : IN ANTICIPATION OF THE GROWING SEASON

18

A typical herbarium label showing a variety of information.


19

IN ANTICIPATION OF THE GROWING SEASON

The Slow Empiricist

The growing season for most of temperate North America is beginning and the amateur botanist is eagerly looking to the time when he or she can begin to explore for their favorite species, the orchids that they admire so much and hope to find in the ensuing months. The non-growing season should not have been spent in idle pursuits for this is the time that the amateur should be taking stock of his or her limitations and becoming more experienced in the study of and knowledge about orchids.

One of the ways that a person can find out about orchids is to travel to the closest herbarium and make use of the information that these places contain. Many universities have excellent resources in their herbaria and are usually very happy to accommodate anyone who has a serious interest in plants. At the end of this article I have listed the names and places where you can go to make use of the information that herbaria provide.

For the most inexperienced of us, an herbarium is an archival place that stores information in the form of


20

specimens and accompanying data about the specimens, much like a library stocks books for reference. Often the specimen is preserved under a clear plastic sheet, which shows you somewhat how the plant looked in its mature form. I say somewhat because to the beginner seeing such a sheet; it might look like a dried up, slightly shriveled, desiccated piece of flora that has little resemblance to the living plant. What it can do is provide you with all idea of the relative size of the plant and the general outline of the plant. You can see the position of the leaves, if they are present, or, learn that the leaves were absent at flowering. You will get an idea of the floral parts and their relationship to each other and the rest of the plant structure. Usually, the roots are present as well and can give you further information about the plant.

There should be a label affixed to the sheet with information about where the specimen was collected, when it was collected and possibly other pertinent data. Sometimes the collector will give very specific information as to the location and just as often, only a general idea as to the site locale. Dates of collection will give you an approximate idea of when the plants bloom in the particular area where they were collected. Each year, it should be remembered, will not be exactly like any other, so the information should be used judiciously. The same holds true for the specific sites mentioned. Many things happen over the years between the time something has been collected and the year that you go in search of the same site. Even if the information has been very specific, the site may have


21

been drastically changed. Sites are cleared for development; successional changes occur in sites that are not disturbed and attacks from disease, animal interference or acts of nature like fire or drought can affect the location to the detriment of the plants you are seeking. I can give you a couple of actual examples that muddied orchid hunting using herbarium information. In one instance the state put in a new road with the same route number as the old. It sometimes followed the original route and at other times cut through new territory. If one isn't aware that these changes occurred, mileages could be thrown off, or old abandoned sections totally missed. The other example shows the craftiness of the collector of the specimen as he/she describes the location for the vouchers. I was told by Paul Martin Brown that he had to collect directions from 12 different herbaria because the lady who described the location of the plants gave only a portion of the directions to each institution. Her intent was to protect the location from the casual enthusiast and to make it as difficult as possible to discover her site, thereby, to her mind I'm surmising, protecting the specimens from harm.

The people who work in the herbarium are an excellent source to find and use the information that you are seeking. If you can be persistent in requesting more information from them you may find out current


22

status or additional data that has not yet been logged into the collections, or, if you are lucky you can pick up that the route was straightened several years ago, throwing the distances off and not fail in your quest. They can point you to other references in journals, periodicals and related literature that will help fill out the picture of the species you are seeking. I would also suggest that when you begin to look at herbarium sheets that you take notes of what you have discovered and that you carry a hand lens to more closely examine the specimens. When you are looking at them up close you may get a better understanding of the structure and how it might differ from a related species. The genus Spiranthes comes to mind as being closely alike but having subtle differences. Here herbarium sheets can reveal the differences and should be immensely helpful in distinguishing species that bloom at different times and locales that can't be compared side-by-side in the field. Two specimens from the collection can be put out for side-by-side comparison and easy examination.

I hope you will try to make use of the valuable information that is available to you at these institutions so that you will be better prepared to conduct your forays into nature. You may even get to the point of helping the herbaria grow by contributing information to them from your own expeditious discoveries.

Nearly all colleges and universities with biology or botany departments, regardless of size, as well as many natural history museums and botanical gardens, have an herbarium. Before visiting it is always prudent


23

to make an appointment so a member of the herbarium staff can assist you. In smaller institutions there may not be a full time staff person. Each herbarium has its own set of guidelines for examining and handling specimens, and often you will be asked to read these through and sign indicating that you fully understand their rules and agree to abide by them. To find a herbarium in your area you need to consult the Index Herbariorum, a publication that lists all the herbaria in the world, what their specialties are and the proper persons to contact to make arrangements for a visit. Although this reference work is usually only found at herbaria it can also be accessed on the Internet at http://www.nybg.org/bsci/ih/ih.html.

If you do not have Internet access, any herbarium can advise you of other herbaria. Some major herbaria in different parts of North America are: CANADA McGill Herbarium Macdonald Campus of McGill University 21111 Lakeshore Rd. Ste.-Anne-de-Bellevue, Québec, H9X-3V9 Phone: 398-7864 Fax: 398-7897 US Harvard University Herbaria, 22 Divinity Avenue, Cambridge Massachusetts 02138, Emily W. Wood Manager Of The Systematics Collections


24

Email: [email protected] Phone: (617) 495-1495 Fax: (617) 495-9484 The Marion Ownbey Herbarium Department of Botany Washington State University Pullman, WA 99164-4238 Phone: 509-335-3250 FAX: 509-335-3517 E-mail: [email protected] Larry Hufford, Director E-mail: [email protected]

University of Florida Herbarium (FLAS) Florida Museum of Natural History 379 Dickinson Hall PO Box 110575 Gainesville, FL 32611-0575 USA Telephone: (352) 392-1767 Fax: (352) 846-2016 Dr. Norris H. Williams, Curator Kent D. Perkins Collection Manager E-mail: [email protected] Herbarium Missouri Botanical Garden P.O. Box 299 Saint Louis, Missouri 63166-0299 Location: 4344 Shaw Boulevard. Phone: 314/577-5196 Fax: 314/ 577-9596. http://www.mobot.org


25

Jepson Herbarium University of California 1001 Valley Life Sciences Building #2465 Berkeley, California 94720-2465 U.S.A. Phone: 510/ 643-7008. Fax: 510/ 643-5390. http://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/

Brent D. Mishler, [email protected] MEXICO

Herbario AMO Apartado Postal 53-123 11320 Mexico City, Distrito Federal Mexico Location: Cerrada de Moctezuma 16, La Herradura, 53920 Huixquilucan, Estado de México, Mexico.

Eric Hagsater Phone: [52] 5/ 294-2862. Fax: [52] 5/ 531-4349

Email:[email protected] The Slow Empiricist

Keenan: A SHORT HISTORY OF THE GENUS CYPRIPEDIUM

26

wild coco Eulophia alta

Emanuel et al.: OCCURRENCE OF WILD COCO


27

OCCURRENCE OF WILD COCO, EULOPHIA ALTA (L.) Fawcett & Rendle,

AT ROCK SPRINGS RUN STATE RESERVE, ORANGE COUNTY,

FLORIDA

Brian Emanuel, Jo Anna Watson Baber & Mike Beckwith

Wild coco, Eulophia alta, has previously been observed in Orange County, Florida (Keith Fischer pers. comm., Walter Taylor pers. comm.) however, it has never been documented through a voucher specimen. In May of 1999 author Mike Beckwith observed a small colony of this terrestrial orchid on the STS mitigation site of Rock Springs Run State Reserve. Subsequent searching by the authors revealed three additional populations of wild coco on the property. The populations range in size from 4 to 20 plants. The plants were observed flowering from September through November 1999.

Rock Springs Run State Reserve is located south of State Road 46 twelve miles west of US Interstate 4 in Orange and Lake Counties, Florida. All four populations are in Orange County, less than .5 km of the Lake County line to the north. It seems probable,



28

with further surveying that this species will be found within Lake County.

The populations of wild coco are found in wet pastures that border forested wetlands. They are growing in association with bahia grass (Paspalum notatum), dog fennel (Eupatorium capillifolium), day flower (Commelina erecta), ceasar weed (Urena lobata), green briar (Smilax sp.), trumpet vine (Campsis radicans), climbing hempweed (Mikania scandens), salt bush (Baccharis halimifolia), coinwort (Centella erecta), passion flower, (Passiflora incarnata), live oak (Quercus virginiana), and laurel oak (Quercus hemisphaerica).

Soil samples were collected at three of the wild coco populations. The soil type of all three samples is Immokalee fine sand. It is nearly level, poorly drained and exhibits a low organic matter content of 1-2%. The pH of the soil ranges from 5.7 � 5.8.

A voucher specimen has been sent to the University of South Florida Herbarium in Tampa. Brian Emanuel Wekiva Basin GeoPark 1800 Wekiwa Circle Apopka, Florida 32712 Jo Anna Watson Baber Mike Beckwith St. Johns River Water Management District 31600 CR – 433 Sorrento, Florida 32776



43

A SHORT HISTORY OF THE GENUS CYPRIPEDIUM

Phillip E. Keenan

It is no secret that Cyps (insider jargon) are my favorite native orchids. Nothing unusual there. I am sure many of you have the same preference. There are 12 species in North America and about 33 species in eastern Asia (a flexible figure that depends on the latest authority), with the most diversity in China where some 30 species have been discovered. North America is second. The great Linnaeus, the Swede, first offered the genus name Cypripedium (from the island of Cyprus, birthplace of Venus, and the Greek word meaning slipper) in his Genera Plantarum in 1737, and later in his Species Plantarum in 1753. All the slipper orchids were included in the one genus of Cypripedium until Pfitzer, in 1888, split the tropical species into three separate genera:

1. the so-called conduplicate-leaved Paphiopedilum (approximately 60 species) of southeast Asia,

2. the South American Phragmipedium (approximately 20 species), and

3. a much smaller South American genus, the Selenepedium (3 or 4 species), and


44

counting Cypripedium for a total of four genera.

4. Recently, a fifth genus was added: Mexipedium, based on a single species from southern Mexico. (NANOJ 3(3): 341.)

The taxonomy and classification of Cypripedium, therefore, "officially" dates back to 1888, even though many of the species were first discovered long before then. In fact, according to Merle Reinikka in his A History of the Orchid (1972), page 10, "the occurrence of a native North American orchid in Europe" predates the introduction of tropical species by sixty years.

Examples include Cypripedium acaule, the pink

lady's-slipper, first described by the Englishman, William Aiton in 1789, based on a plant that first flowered in Kew, England at the famous Royal Botanic Gardens, from an introduction three years earlier by a Sir William Hamilton (I could find no actual location and date in North America). Historically, the first mention of the pink lady's-slipper dates back to 1700, when plants were given multiple names in a period long before the binomial system of naming plants was established by Linnaeus. The earliest New England colonial settlements date back to the early 1600's, so it took awhile for the settlers to take much scientific notice of the flora, preoccupied as they were with simply surviving in their new land. It is interesting to note that the earliest colored painting of any North American slipper orchid is that of Cypripedium acaule by one of America's earliest botanists, Mark Catesby in


45

1754, in his The Natural History of Carolina, Florida and the Bahama Islands. One hundred years later, on June 5, 1856, to be exact, Henry David Thoreau, in one of only two or three references to the pink lady's-slipper in his Journals, waxed enthusiastically: " Everywhere now in dry pitch pine woods stand the red lady's-slippers over the red pine leaves on the forest floor, rejoicing in June." The first black and white drawing of C. acaule, however, is that of Leonard Plukenet in 1700 when he gave it the long, unwieldy, descriptive pre-Linnean name of "Helleborine Calceolus dicta, Mariana, folis, binis e radice ex adverso prodeuntibus." Quite a mouthful. We have Carolus Linnaeus to thank for bringing uniformity into the world of taxonomy (naming of plants and animals) with binomial nomenclature.

Another early discovery involved the queen lady's-slipper, Cypripedium reginae, the second North American slipper orchid to be named, which was "officially" described as C. reginae in 1788, by a Thomas Walter, an American, in Flora Caroliniana (actual location not known), the same year he died, at the age of 48. The queen lady's-slipper was first known well before 1731 when a Philip Miller grew it in Chelsea, England. Apparently no one bothered to describe it then, at least according to the "new" rules of nomenclature. Many of North America's beautiful lady's-slippers - as well as other orchids from all over the world - were first imported and grown in England, especially dating from the establishment of The Horticultural Society of London in 1809. The English have always loved their orchids and could afford to send out most of the early


46

explorers who scoured the world and shipped hundreds of thousands of plants back to their employers in England, most of which died in transit or later on in suffocating hot houses before the key to successful indoor growing was mastered.

These earliest discoveries can be contrasted with some of the latest on the west coast, following the Lewis and Clark Expedition funded by President Thomas Jefferson in the early 1800s. Cypripedium fasciculatum, the fascinating little brownie lady's-slipper, was neither discovered nor described until 1882 by Sereno Watson (NANOJ 1(1):59) of the United States who based it on a collection made in northern California (Plumas County near Prattville, May 1881)) and Washington state (White Salmon River, May 1880) by gentlemen named Austin, Bradley and Suksdorf. It would be highly interesting to read the stories of these early explorations and discoveries, but apparently most of these intrepid men failed to keep detailed accounts of their travels. Too bad.

A co-endemic of Cypripedium fasciculatum, with perhaps the most restricted range of any North American lady's-slipper, is the charming California lady's-slipper slipper orchid, C. californicum, of the northern Sierras in California and the Siskyous in extreme southwestern Oregon. It too is one of the last lady's-slippers to be discovered on the North American continent. Asa Gray first described it in 1868 in the Proceedings of the American Academy 7:389, from the Red Mountains in Plumas County, California, with no date.


47

The third member of the three northwestern

endemics is Cypripedium montanum, the mountain lady's-slipper, first collected (in Washington State) and described by the famous English explorer, David Douglas, in 1840. Again, the actual "official" description was made by the famous English orchidologist, John Lindley in 1840 in his Genera and Species of Orchids p. 528, six years after Douglas' untimely and freakish death at the age of 35. He died after a fall in an animal trap and subsequent goring by a bull that occurred in Hawaii in 1834, after several narrow escapes in the Pacific Northwest. Douglas is also noted for having more plants named in his honor than any other botanist in history, the Douglas fir, of course, one of the best known. It was not discovered by Douglas, however (Archibald Menzies, a Scotsman gets the credit). Quite a record for one who died so young.

The Kentucky lady's-slipper, Cypripedium kentuckiense, is an example of a slipper assumed to be a variation of another, in this case the yellow lady's-slipper, C. parviflorum var. parviflorum (or var. pubescens). Finally, it was described as a distinctive species in 1981 by Clyde Reed and generally supported as a valid species since then (NANOJ 1(3):255).

The ram's-head lady's-slipper, Cypripedium arietinum, was another introduction via English botanists: Robert Brown first describing it in 1813 based on a flower that bloomed in Kew from a North American collection in 1808 by Chandler and


48

Buckingham. It is arguably the most distinctive American slipper orchid because of its conical pouch or lip petal. It is also closely related to the Chinese species C. plectrochilum, (apparently no common name) which also has a conical shape of the lip. The latter was discovered by an Abbe Delavay in southwest Sichuan and described by the Frenchman, M.A. Franchet in 1885, more than 75 years after our C. arietinum. Franchet thought at the time of his discovery that it might actually be the same species as ours. Apparently difficult to distinguish as herbarium specimens, they are easily distinguished in the field: rams-head is white with heavy purple veining below the opening (mouth) in the pouch, while plectrochilum is almost entirely white with sometimes only a light pink wash and a pure white staminode. Also, the shape of the lip is actually quite different from our C. arietinum. Incidentally, Asa Gray (1810-1888), the famous Harvard botanist, was one of the earliest to point out the similarity between many plants of eastern North America and eastern Asia. (NANOJ 4(1):31).

We owe a debt of gratitude to French missionaries for first astonishing the rest of the world by the richness of the Chinese species of Cypripedium after 1894, many years after the last of our three Pacific Northwest endemics were discovered. The famous American plantsman, E.H. Wilson, of the Arnold Arboretum of Harvard University in Jamaica Plain (Boston), Massachusetts, is believed to be the first to send back living material (the others were herbarium specimens) of Chinese cyps. Both the yellow Cypripedium


49

flavum and the wonderfully rich purple C. tibeticum were successfully grown by 1911 in the Arnold Arboretum.

Continuing with the American members of the genus, Cypripedium passerinum, has two common names, sparrow's-egg lady's-slipper and Franklin's lady's-slipper, the latter a reference to the famous Arctic explorer who led an expedition within the Arctic where the Englishman, Sir John Richardson, collected the first plant in 1823. It is the most northern of our American slipper orchids. Cypripedium candidum, the small white lady's-slipper, was first described by the German, Karl Ludwig Willdenow, in 1805, from a collection by the American, Heinrich Muhlenberg in Pennsylvania.

Cypripedium guttatum, the spotted lady's-slipper, was first described in 1800 by the Swede, Olof Swartz, from an eastern Siberian plant first collected by J. G. Gmelin. It could be the world champion slipper orchid in terms of distribution, clear across Siberia and into Alaska. The controversial Cypripedium yatabeanum, was considered for many years by many authors a variety of C. guttatum. It was first described as a separate species by the Japanese, Tomitaro Makino, in 1899. Ernst Pfitzer in 1903 retained its varietal status. Brown revalidated its specific status in 1996 (NANOJ 1(3):239); and Phillip Cribb, in 1997, retained its specific status in his great book on The Genus Cypripedium, on the basis of its yellow-green basic color which is marked with brown rather than the white and purple colors in C. guttatum. The two apparently hybridize on the Aleutians and


50

around Anchorage, Alaska, where Paul Martin Brown formally recognized the natural hybrid as C. xalaskanum in 1995 (NANOJ 1(3):239).

That brings us to the Cypripedium calceolus complex, the yellow lady's-slipper of Europe, and, at one time not too long ago, of North America, until J. T. Atwood, in 1985, pronounced the American yellow-lipped slippers distinct from the European yellow calceolus, a belief quickly sanctioned by most orchid experts in North America, as well as Phillip Cribb, the English authority at Kew. This separation eventually resulted in Sheviak's formation of the North American taxa Cypripedium parviflorum var. parviflorum, C. parviflorum var. pubescens, and C. parviflorum var. makasin, (NANOJ 2(4):319): one species with three varieties.

The lady's-slipper orchid, Cypripedium calceolus, of

Europe is probably the best known and most frequently illustrated of all orchids throughout the world (Cribb even adds "of all flowering plants"). It was first illustrated in 1541 and first recognized as a European native as early as 1568. It was also the first slipper orchid recognized in Linnaeus' Genera Plantarum in 1737. Finally, it is of the most widely distributed of all slipper orchids, from England to Japan, via much of Europe and a much narrower corridor through Siberia and eastern Asia.

For a detailed explanation of the taxonomic confusion - and resolution - in the yellow slipper complex, one should consult two excellent authors: the


51

aforementioned The Genus Cypripedium by Phillip Cribb. And Charles Sheviak who has written several articles in the American Orchid Society Bulletin in 1994 and 1995 (NANOJ 2(4):319). The degree of resolution, however, as they freely admit, is subject to change with further notice.

In his classification, Cribb recognizes eleven sections or subdivisions of the genus Cypripedium, according to their anatomical, morphological and molecular relationships, which help in showing which species are more closely related to each other. In that regard, C. acaule is in the monotypic section Acaulia, having no close allies in the genus as evidenced by its unique physical makeup. Another monotypic section is section Enantiopedilum that finds the little brownie lady's-slipper, C. fasciculatum alone. The beautiful and unique slippers of C. californicum Cribb places in a section Irapeana that also includes the Mexican species C. irapeanum, C. molle, and C. dickinsonianum (NANOJ 2(1):3). The largest is section Cypripedium, and contains the most species of all, including our C. parviflorum, C. candidum, and C. montanum, all closely related. Cypripedium reginae and C. passerinum are members of the section Obtusipetala. The section Bifolia includes the two closely related Alaskans, C. guttatum and C. yatabeanum. The last section of North American representatives is Trigonopedia which includes C. arietinum and the closely related Asiatic, C. plectrochilum. The other four sections, not mentioned here, include only Asiatic members of the genus.


52

Philip E. Keenan, 31 Hillcrest Drive, Dover, NH 03820 Philip is the author of numerous articles on North American native orchids and the recent book Wild Orchids Across North America published by Timber Press.

Cypripedium acaule

pink lady's-slipper


53

Western Specialties: Left: Cypripedium montanum, mountain lady's-slipper; top right: C. californicum California lady's-slipper slipper orchid; bottom right: Cypripedium fasciculatum, brownie lady's-slipper


54

The Yellow-flowered Slippers top: left � large yellow lady�s-slipper, C. parviflorum var. pubescens Right: Kentucky lady�s-slipper, C. kentuckiense Bottom: left � northern small yellow lady's-slipper, C. parviflorum var. makasin right � southern small yellow lady's-slipper, C. parviflorum var. parviflorum


55

The Alaska Connection Cypripedium guttatum, spotted lady's-slipper; Cypripedium yatabeanum, Palomino lady�s-slipper,


56

queen lady's-slipper Cypripedium reginae


57

FOR YOUR INFORMATION!

Two new species have recently been published for North America. In the December issue of Lindleyana Chuck Sheviak published an extensive article describing Platanthera aquilonis. He gives exhaustive evidence as to the separation of this species from Platanthera hyperborea in North America. This also requires a new combination for the previously published Platanthera hyperborea forma alba. Platanthera aquilonis Sheviak forma alba (Light) P.M. Brown comb. nov. Basionym: Platanthera hyperborea (Linnaeus) Lindley var. hyperborea forma alba Light. Light, M.S. & M. MacConaill. 1989. Lindleyana 4(3): 158-160. The following should be added to the Checklist: Platanthera aquilonis Sheviak SYN: Platanthera hyperborea (Linnaeus) Lindley in part NORTHERN GREEN BOG ORCHIS AK - NF s to CA, NM, IA e to MA forma alba (Light) P.M. Brown - albino form Brown, P.M. 2000. NANOJ 6(1): 43. Light, M.S. & M. MacConaill. 1989. Lindleyana 4(3): 158-160. Sheviak, C.J. 1999. Lindleyana 14(4): 193-203

In the December issue of Novon John Freudenstein published Corallorhiza bentleyi, and entirely new species from West Virginia. This is a most curious and intriguing species that is restricted to a few square meters of land. The following should be added to the Checklist: Corallorhiza bentleyi Freudenstein BENTLEY'S CORALROOT Freudenstein, J. 1999. Novon 9: 511-513.

Wagner, Wagner & Brown: RARE, THREATENED AND ENDANGED ORCHIDS IN NORTH AMERICA

Part 1. Alabama - Kansas

44

RARE, THREATENED AND ENDANGED ORCHIDS IN NORTH

AMERICA Part 1. Alabama - Kansas

Anne B. Wagner, Ken Wagner, Paul Martin Brown

In commencing to compile all of the information needed to do this four-part article on the listed orchids in North America, Anne & Ken Wagner were approached and agreed to compile all of the data. IT has been a massive work and they are to be congratulated for persisting in contacting all of the various agencies. In reading this information it is essential to know that each state or province has its own criteria and definitions of rare, threatened and endangered. Unfortunately personal opinions and priorities often color the makeup of these lists. We are trying to give references wherever possible for the plants that are listed. Some states update continually other as far apart as 10 years! Very few states afford legal protection to the plants. Websites are given and a contact person when known. The nomenclature used is as it was received from the various sources and often does not agree with contemporary usage. In the December Journal a complete list of cross-reference for the names will be given as well as a summary by species.



45

If a given species is not listed for a given state or province it means that the status has not been determined - and that for any number of reasons. When available, the status within the state or province is given. Although abbreviations are not always consistent the following usually are reliable: (may be preceded by a S for state) E = Endangered S1 T = Threatened S2 R=Rare S3 SC= Special Concern S3 X= extirpated H = historical For precise definitions and current status readers are encouraged to contact the sources listed for each state and province. ALABAMA Inventory List of Rare, Threatened and Endangered, Plants, Animals and Natural Communities of Alabama dated June 1999 published by TNC, Alabama Natural Heritage Program. http://www.heritage.tnc.org/nhp/us/al/ Aplectrum hyemale S2 Calopogon barbatus S1 Calopogon multiflorus S1 Corallorhiza wisteriana S2 Cypripedium candidum S1 Cypripedium kentuckiense S1 Epidendrum conopseum S2 Isotria verticillata S2 Liparis liliifolia S1 Liparis loeselii S1? Listera australis S2



46

Platanthera blephariglottis var conspicua S1S2 Platanthera flava var flava S2S3 Platanthera integra S1S2 Platanthera integrilabia S2 Platanthera lacera S2 Platanthera nivea S2? Platanthera peramoena S1 Ponthieva racemosa S2 Pteroglossaspis ecristata S1 Spiranthes longilabris S1 Spiranthes lucida S1 Spiranthes magnicamporum S3 ALASKA No response No Orchidaceae listed in the �Rare List.� Vascular Plant Tracking List (listall.html) was updated in Feb 1998 and lists the following: Feb 1998 http://www.uaa.alaska.edu/enri/aknhp_web/ http://www.uaa.alaska.edu/enri/aknhp_web/biodiversity/botanical/vascular_species_concern/species_table/botlist.html Cypripedium montanum S1 Cypripedium parviflorum S2S3 Listera convallarioides S1 Malaxis paludosa S2S3 Piperia unalascensis S2 Platanthera chorisiana S3 Platanthera gracilis S2 Platanthera orbiculata S1 ARIZONA Arizona Game and Fish Department Heritage Data Management System September 21, 1999 http://www.gf.state.az.us/ Calypso bulbosa SR



47

Coeloglossum viride var. virescens SR Cypripedium parviflorum var. pubescens HS Goodyera repens SR Hexalectris revoluta HS Hexalectris spicata SR Hexalectris warnockii SR Listera convallarioides SR Malaxis corymbosa SR Malaxis porphyrea SR Malaxis tenuis SR Platanthera hyperborea SR Platanthera limosa SR Platanthera purpurascens SR Platanthera zothecina SR Schiedeella parasitica SR Spiranthes delitescens HS Stenorrhynchos michuacanum SR HS Highly Safeguarded: no collection allowed. SR Salvage Restricted: collection only with permit. ARKANSAS ARKANSAS NATURAL HERITAGE COMMISSION 27 SEP 1999 Cindy Osborne, Data Manager Arkansas Natural Heritage Commission 1500 Tower Building 323 Center Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Phone: 501-324-9762, Fax: 501-324-9618 e-mail: [email protected] http://www.heritage.state.ar.us:80/nhc/heritage.html Calopogon oklahomensis S2 Calopogon tuberosus S2 Cypripedium kentuckiense S3 Cypripedium reginae S1 Habenaria repens S2



48

Hexalectris spicata S2 Liparis loeselii S1 Platanthera cristata S1S2 Platanthera flava S1S2 Platanthera nivea SH Platanthera peramoena S2 Pogonia ophioglossoides S2 Spiranthes lucida S2 Spiranthes magnicamporum S1 Spiranthes odorata S1 Spiranthes praecox S1S2 CALIFORNIA California Native Plant Society's Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California Roxanne Bittman Botanist, California Natural Diversity Database Department of Fish and Game (916)323-8970 (w) [email protected] http://www.dfg.ca.gov/whdab/cnddb.htm Corallorhiza trifida S2 Cypripedium californicum S4 Cypripedium fasciculatum S4 Cypripedium montanum S4 Listera cordata S4 Malaxis monophyllos ssp. brachypoda S2 Piperia candida S4 Piperia michaelii S4 Piperia yadonii S1 COLORADO Contact: Jill Handwerk, Botany Information Manager, Colo NHP [email protected] www.cnhp.colostate.edu



49

http://www.cnhp.colostate.edu/ http://ndis.nrel.colostate.edu/ndis/rareplants/cover.html Cypripedium fasciculatum S3 Cypripedium pubescens S2 Epipactis gigantea S2 Listera borealis S2 Listera convallarioides S2 Malaxis brachypoda S1 Platanthera sparsiflora var. ensifolia S3 Platanthera zothecina S1 Spiranthes diluvialis S2 CONNECTICUT Extracted from Connecticut's Plant list(plants.htm). http://dep.state.ct.us/cgnhs/nddb/nddb2.htm http://dep.state.ct.us/cgnhs/nddb/plants.htm Aplectrum hyemale SC Arethusa bulbosa E Coeloglossum viride var. virescens SC Corallorhiza trifida T Cypripedium arietinum SC* Cypripedium parviflorum SC* Cypripedium reginae E Goodyera repens var. ophioides SC* Isotria medeoloides E Liparis liliifolia E Malaxis brachypoda E Malaxis unifolia E Platanthera blephariglottis E Platanthera ciliaris T Platanthera dilatata SC* Platanthera flava SC Platanthera hookeri SC* Platanthera orbiculata SC* Spiranthes tuberosa var. grayi SC* Triphora trianthophora SC*



50

* Believed Extirpated DELAWARE September 23, 1999 Bill McAvoy Botanist, Delaware Natural Heritage Program 302-653-2880 http://www.dnrec.state.de.us/fw/wildrehe.htm Aplectrum hyemale S2 Arethusa bulbosa SH Calopogon tuberosus var. tuberosus S1 Cleistes divaricata SX Corallorhiza maculata var. maculata SH Corallorhiza odontorhiza var. odontorhiza S1 Corallorhiza wisteriana SH Cypripedium acaule S5 Cypripedium pubescens S1 Galearis spectabilis S3 Goodyera pubescens S4 Isotria medeoloides S1.1 Isotria verticillata S3 Liparis liliifolia S2 Listera australis S2 Malaxis unifolia S1 Platanthera blephariglottis var. conspicua S1 Platanthera ciliaris SH Platanthera clavellata S5 Platanthera cristata S2 Platanthera flava var. herbiola S1 Platanthera grandiflora SX Platanthera lacera S3 Platanthera nivea SH Platanthera peramoena S1.1 Platanthera psycodes SH Pogonia ophioglossoides S2 Spiranthes cernua S4



51

Spiranthes lacera var. gracilis S2 Spiranthes lucida SH Spiranthes odorata SU Spiranthes praecox SH Spiranthes tuberosa S1.1 Spiranthes vernalis S2 Tipularia discolor S5 Triphora trianthophora S1.1 FLORIDA Florida Department of Plant Industry Nancy C. Coile endangered: Basiphyllaea corallicola Brassia caudata Bulbophyllum pachyrhachis Calopogon multiflorus Campylocentrum pachyrrhizum Corallorhiza odontorhiza Cranichis muscosa Cyrtopodium punctatum Eltroplectris calcarata Encyclia boothiana Encyclia cochleata Encyclia pygmaea Epidendrum acunae Epidendrum anceps Epidendrum difforme Epidendrum nocturnum Epidendrum rigidum Epidendrum strobiliferum Galeandra beyrichii Goodyera pubescens Govenia utriculata Habenaria distans Hexalectris spicata



52

Ionopsis utricularioides Isotria verticillata Leochilus labiatus Lepanthopsis melanantha Liparis nervosa Macradenia lutescens Malaxis unifolia Maxillaria crassifolia Maxillaria parviflora Oncidium bahamense Oncidium floridanum Oncidium luridum. Platanthera clavellata Platanthera integra Pleurothallis gelida Polyradicion lindenii Polystachya concreta Ponthieva brittoniae Prescottia oligantha Spiranthes adnata Spiranthes brevilabris Spiranthes costaricensis Spiranthes elata Spiranthes ovalis Spiranthes polyantha Spiranthes torta Triphora craigheadii Triphora latifolia Tropidia polystachya Vanilla barbellata Vanilla dilloniana Vanilla mexicana Vanilla phaeantha

Threatened: Bletia purpurea



53

Cleistes divaricata Harrisella filiformis Listera australis Platanthera blephariglottis Platanthera ciliaris Platanthera cristata Platanthera flava Platanthera nivea Pogonia ophioglossoides Pteroglossaspis ecristata Spiranthes laciniata Spiranthes longilabris Spiranthes tuberosa Stenorrhynchos lanceolatus Tipularia discolor Triphora trianthophora; 2 commercially-exploited: Encyclia tampensis Epidendrum conopseum.

Florida Natural Areas Inventory Extracted from �Florida Natural Areas Inventory, Tracked Species - Plants and Lichens� (plants.htm) in FLA folder http://www.fnai.org/index.htm http://www.fnai.org/plants.htm#P Basiphyllaea corallicola S1 Brassia caudata SX Bulbophyllum pachyrachis S1 Campylocentrum pachyrrhizum S1 Corallorhiza odontorhiza S1 Cranichis muscosa SH Eltroplectris calcarata S1 Epidendrum blancheanum S1 Epidendrum nocturnum S2 Epidendrum strobiliferum S1



54

Galeandra beyrichii S1 Goodyera pubescens S1 Govenia utriculata S1 Ionopsis utricularioides S1 Isotria verticillata S1 Lepanthopsis melanantha S1 Macradenia lutescens SX Malaxis unifolia S3 Maxillaria crassifolia S1 Oncidium bahamense S1 Oncidium floridanum S1 Oncidium undulatum S1 Platanthera clavellata S1 Platanthera integra S3S4 Pleurothallis gelida S2 Polyrrhiza lindenii S2 Ponthieva brittoniae S1 Prescottia oligantha S1 Pteroglossaspis ecristata S2 Spiranthes costaricensis S1 Spiranthes elata S1 Spiranthes lanceolata var. paludicolaS1 Spiranthes polyantha S1S2 Spiranthes torta S1 Triphora craigheadii S1 Triphora latifolia SH Triphora yucatenensis S1 Tropidia polystachya SX Vanilla barbellata S2 Vanilla mexicana S1 Vanilla phaeantha S2 GEORGIA Greg Krakow, Data Manager Georgia Natural Heritage Program



55

2117 U.S. Hwy. 278 S.E. Social Circle, GA 30025 Voice: (770) 918-6411, (706) 557-3032; Fax: (706) 557-3033 EMail: [email protected] http://www.dnr.state.ga.us/dnr/wild/natural.html http://www.dnr.state.ga.us/dnr/wild/sppl_t.htm http://www.dnr.state.ga.us/dnr/wild/sppl_w.htm Calopogon multiflorus SH Cleistes bifaria S1 Corallorhiza maculata SH Cypripedium acaule S4 Cypripedium calceolus var. parviflorum S2 Cypripedium calceolus var. pubescens S3 Epidendrum conopseum S3 Habenaria quinqueseta var. quinqueseta S1 Isotria medeoloides S2 Listera australis S2 Listera smallii S2 Malaxis spicata S1 Platanthera flava var. herbiola S1 Platanthera grandiflora S1 Platanthera integra S2 Platanthera integrilabia S1S2 Platanthera nivea S3 Platanthera peramoena S1 Platanthera psycodes S1? Ponthieva racemosa S2? Pteroglossaspis ecristata S1 Spiranthes brevilabris var. floridana S1 Spiranthes longilabris S1 Spiranthes magnicamporum S1 Spiranthes ovalis S3 HAWAII Extracted from �plist.htm� in Hawaii folder.



56

http://www.heritage.tnc.org/nhp/us/hi/ Platanthera holochila s1.2 IDAHO Idaho Native Plant Society (INPS) http://www2.state.id.us/fishgame/cdchome.htm Cypripedium fasciculatum = State Priority 2 Cypripedium parviflorum var. pubescens = State Priority 1 Eburophyton austinae = State Monitor Platanthera obtusata = Review Platanthera orbiculata = State Monitor Spiranthes diluvialis = Global Priority 2 ILLINOIS Illinois Endangered Species Protection Board, Lincoln Tower Plaza, 524 South Second Street, Springfield, IL 62701-1787 Endangered Calopogon tuberosus Cypripedium acaule Cypripedium calceolus var. parviflorum Cypripedium reginae Hexalectris spicata Isotria medeoloides Isotria verticillata Platanthera ciliaris Platanthera clavellata Platanthera flava var. flava Platanthera flava var. herbiola Platanthera leucophaea Pogonia ophioglossoides Spiranthes lucida Spiranthes romanzoffiana Spiranthes vernalis Threatened Corallorhiza maculata Cypripedium candidum



57

INDIANA Michael Homoya, Botanist/Plant Ecologist Indiana DNR Division of Nature Preserves http://www.ai.org/dnr/naturepr/index.htm http://www.ai.org/dnr/naturepr/endanger/plant.htm Arethusa bulbosa SX Coeloglossum viride ST Corallorhiza trifida SX Cypripedium calceolus var. parviflorum SR Cypripedium candidum SR Hexalectris spicata SR Malaxis unifolia SE Platanthera ciliaris SE Platanthera dilatata SE Platanthera flava var. flava SE Platanthera hookeri SX Platanthera hyperborea ST Platanthera leucophaea SE Platanthera orbiculata SX Platanthera psycodes SR Spiranthes lucida SR Spiranthes magnicamporum SE Spiranthes ochroleuca ST Spiranthes romanzoffiana SE Spiranthes vernalis SR IOWA Iowa Native Plant Society c/o Ed Freese, President 120 Sixth Avenue S.W. Waverly, IA 50677 http://www.heritage.tnc.org/nhp/us/ia/ ftp://ftp.heritage.tnc.org/pub/nhp/us/ia/species.html Aplectrum hyemale- none Calopogon tuberosus- S



58

Coeloglossum viride- none Corallorhiza maculata- T Corallorhiza odontorhiza- none Cypripedium X andrewsii- none Cypripedium calceolus var. parviflorum- none Cypripedium calceolus var. pubescens- none Cypripedium candidum- S Cypripedium reginae- T Galearis spectabilis- none Goodyera pubescens- none Liparis liliifolia- none Liparis loeselii- none Malaxis unifolia- S Platanthera clavellata- S Platanthera flava- E Platanthera hookeri- T Platanthera hyperborea- T Platanthera lacera- S Platanthera leucophaea- E Platanthera praeclara- T Platanthera psycodes- S Spiranthes cernua- none Spiranthes lacera- T Spiranthes lucida- E Spiranthes magnicamporum- S Spiranthes ovalis- T Spiranthes romanzoffiana- T Spiranthes vernalis- T Triphora trianthophora- none KANSAS The Kansas Natural Heritage Inventory (KSNHI) http://www.heritage.tnc.org/nhp/us/ks/ ftp://ftp.heritage.tnc.org/pub/nhp/us/ks/plants.html Calopogon oklahomensis D.H. Goldman S1 Hexalectris spicata (Walter) Barnhart S1



59

Liparis loeselii (L.) Rich. SH Malaxis unifolia Michx. S1 Platanthera lacera (Michx.) G. Don var. lacera S2 Platanthera praeclara Sheviak & Bowles S1 Spiranthes lucida (H.H. Eaton) Ames SH Spiranthes ovalis Lindl. S1 Triphora trianthophora (Sw.) Rydb. subsp. trianthophora S1 Platanthera orbiculata var. macrophylla ST Spiranthes tuberosa var. grayi SC*



140

5th ANNUAL NORTH AMERICAN NATIVE ORCHID CONFERENCE

Olympic National Park Port Angeles, Washington

July 16-20, 2000 Speakers will include: Larry Zettler, Scott Stewart, Chuck Sheviak, Carol Ferguson & Kathleen Donham; Cliff Pelchat; Penny Latham; Paul Martin Brown, Ron Coleman, Lorne Heshka and special speaker Joe Liggio author of Wild Orchids of Texas who will speak on the genus Hexalectris, as well as a very special presentation form Europe on the bee orchids. Field Trip highlights will include: Piperia candida Piperia elegans Piperia transversa Piperia unalascensis Epipactis gigantea Cephalanthera austiniae Listera caurina Corallorhiza mertensiana Platanthera hyperborea complex Platanthera dilatata complex



141

And a special trip on the 20th to Lake Elizabeth east of Seattle for

Platanthera chorisiana

And many, many spectacular wildflowers! Registration fee of $55 per person includes all field trips and conference sessions. Registrations should be sent to: North American Native Orchid Alliance PO Box 759 Acton, ME 04001-0759 207/636-2889

Because the date is nearing and the editor will be leaving July 1 for the conference if you wish to attend please call for space. After July 1 you may call Nancy Webb at 617/254-4815 for current information.

Brown: RECENT TAXONOMIC AND DISTRIBUTIONAL NOTES FROM FLORIDA 1.

62

RECENT TAXONOMIC AND DISTRIBUTIONAL NOTES FROM

FLORIDA 5.

Paul Martin Brown

Continuing with the publication of new taxa from Florida, and often applicable to elsewhere in the country, the following are proposed: Corallorhiza wisteriana Conrad forma rubra P.M. Brown forma nova Forma plantae rubra conspeciebus diversa;. TYPE: UNITED STATES: Florida, Marion County. Holotype: Southwest 110th Street. January 24, 2000, Brown 20124 (holotype, FLAS) Photo. NANOJ 2000 6(1): 73. Differing from typical Corallorhiza wisteriana by having its stems red rather than flesh/brown in color; flowers red with a white lip with red spotting. ETYMOLOGY: rubra meaning red for the coloring of the plant Epidendrum amphistomum A. Richard forma rubrifolium P.M. Brown forma nova Forma folius rubrus conspeciebus diversa;. TYPE: UNITED STATES: Florida, Collier County. Holotype: Fakahatchee Swamp. January 30, 2000. Brown 20130


63

(holotype, FLAS). Photo. Luer. 1972. Native Orchids of Florida plate 63:1. Differing from typical Epidendrum amphistomum by having its stem and leaves a rich cranberry red in color. The flowers are somewhat deeper bronze rather than typical green. Plants occur scattered throughout the Fakahatchee Swamp often accompanied by the typical green foliage type. This does not appear to be a function of increased light as the two colors often grow side by side. ETYMOLOGY: rubrifolium for the coloring of the leaves Listera australis Lindley forma scottii P.M. Brown forma nova Forma multiple leave within the inflorescence conspeciebus diversa;. TYPE: UNITED STATES: Florida, Alachua County. Holotype: off Williston Road c. 3 miles west of I-75. January 23, 2000. Brown 20123 (holotype, FLAS). Photo. NANOJ 2000 6(1): 74. ETYMOLOGY: scottii - named for Ken & Betty Scott on whose property the plants were first noted. Listera australis Lindley forma viridis P.M. Brown forma nova Forma cum florae viride conspeciebus diversa;. TYPE: UNITED STATES: Florida, Alachua County. Holotype: off Williston Road c. 3 miles west of I-75. January 23, 2000. Brown 20122 (holotype, FLAS).


64

Photo. NANOJ 2000 6(1): 74. Luer, 1972. Native Orchids of FL. plate 17:6. Flowers and entire plant green rather than with red flowers or rust color on the leaves or stems. ETYMOLOGY: viridis for the green coloration of the flowers and the plant Pteroglossaspis ecristata (Fernald) Rolfe forma flava P.M. Brown forma nova Forma cum florae flava conspeciebus diversa;. TYPE: UNITED STATES: Florida, Hillsboro County. Holotype: 12 September 1965. Beckner #728, with Jim & Rita Lassiter. (holotype, FLAS 92514). Photo. NANOJ 2000 6(1): 73.

First found and photographed by Jim & Rita Lassiter in 1965 the site originally had "hundreds of this yellow-flowered variety in flatwoods off Waters Ave, n.w. of Tampa" and has now been destroyed. There is a current, unverified report for Clay County of this form. I thank the Lassiters for the use of their slide for the color illustration on page 73.

ETYMOLOGY: flava for the yellow coloration of the flowers and the plant Spiranthes xfolsomii P.M. Brown nothospecies nova TYPE: UNITED STATES: Florida, Levy County. Pine barren ponds. A. P. Garber Oct. 1877 s.n. (holotype, FLAS 69863). Photo. NANOJ 2000 6(1) 74.


65

Planta inter Spiranthes longilabris Lindley et Spiranthes odorata (Nuttall) Lindley intermedia et habitu, colore et forma florum, vel proprietibus speciearum mixtis Intermediate in characters between the two parents Spiranthes longilabris and S. odorata. ETYMOLOGY: folsomii after Stan Folsom (1933 - ) who pointed out the potential hybrid in the field.

When we first arrived in Florida in 1997 I had enquired of John Beckner as to the availability of the long-lipped ladies'-tresses, Spiranthes longilabris. He related that it was no long a frequent species as much of the water table had been altered and areas that formerly supported the species were much drier now. But he did note that hybrids between S. longilabris and the fragrant ladies'-tresses, S. odorata were occasionally found. Luer in his Native Orchids of Florida (1972) also notes that the two species were frequently growing near each other.

Subsequent field searches based on herbarium information yielded greatly altered habitat and no S. longilabris. After three seasons and about 2000 miles of searching for S. longilabris we finally found a small colony in Levy County in November 1999. Stan Folsom very quickly noted the presence of Spiranthes odorata nearby and pointed out some plants that appeared to be intermediate in appearance. Careful examination of these plants and comparison to the


66

specimen chosen as the holotype resulted in Spiranthes xfolsomii. The plant found in 1999 appeared much like S. odorata but had flowers with slender petals and narrower leaves indicating the influence of S. longilabris. The annotations on the holotype are of interest to see the varying opinions: [Orig. id.:] Spiranthes brevifolia, Chapm. United States: Florida: Levy County: Pine barren ponds, Levy Co. |CO| Legit, A. P. Garber, M.D., Columbia, Penna. Oct. 1877 FLAS 69863 [Ann.:] Spiranthes longilabris Lindl. [Note:] (atypical basal leaves) [pencilled on annotation: could this be S. laciniata, with the wrong date (and perhaps other data)? [Det.:] J. Beckner [Det. date:] Nov 1965 --- [Ann.:] Spiranthes cernua (L.) L.C. Rich. var. cernua [Det.:] Daniel B. Ward [Det. date:] Jan 1965 Paul Martin Brown is the Editor of this Journal and a Research Associate at the University of Florida Herbarium, Florida Museum of natural History in Gainesville, Florida.

BOOK REVIEW: Genera Orchidacearum Volume 1

67

BOOK REVIEWS:

Genera Orchidacearum Volume 1: General Introduction, Apostasioideae, Cypripedioideae. 1999. A. M. Pridgeon, P. J. Cribb, M. W. Chase, and F. N.

Rasmussen, eds. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK. 16 plates, 55 halftones, 32 line drawings. Hardcover.

214 pages. $75.00.

Mark Whitten

This volume is the first in a planned series of five to be published over the next five or six years. If you are seriously interested in orchids, buy it - this series will become the standard reference on orchid classification for the first part of the next century. Although not the only recent classification of the orchid family (at least seven have appeared in the last 50 years), it promises to be unique for several reasons. First, this series does not represent the opinions of one taxonomist. It is the product of a remarkable collaboration of more than fifty botanists, each contributing their expertise and insight to produce a unified, generic-level classification. Previous classifications have usually been the work of a single taxonomist, and the resulting classifications differ considerably. These differences are probably due to the sheer size and diversity of the family (too great for any


68

single mind) and to the lack of an explicit theory of classification, resulting in the heavy influence of personal opinion and intuition. Second, this series is unique because it is based upon cladistic2 theory and relies heavily upon DNA sequence data to provide a framework for the classification. These techniques provide a level of objectivity that previous classifications lacked and lay the ground for rational (and polite!) discussions of orchid taxonomy.

The series is dedicated to Robert Dressler, who has produced several modern classifications of orchids. One of Dressler's admirable traits is his non-dogmatic approach and willingness to incorporate new data; this flexibility is echoed in Genera Orchidacearum.

Following an introduction by Dressler, the first volume begins with a series of brief (ca. 10 pp.) chapters on the history, elements, and science of classification. These chapters include the history of orchid classification, morphology, anatomy, palynology, embryology, seed morphology, cytogenetics, and molecular systematics. The chapter by Mark Chase on molecular systematics lucidly explains why the current flood of DNA sequence data for orchids is so important in revising our concepts of orchid classification. He emphasizes that DNA information is not superior to traditional morphological data for constructing classifications, but that it is more abundant and far quicker and easier to collect and analyze than non-


69

molecular data. Until we have much more abundant information on orchid biology, DNA sequences will provide our best estimate of evolutionary relationships that are the foundation for classification. The power of molecular techniques was recently shown by two independent DNA studies of Orchis and related genera (one by Pridgeon and others at Kew and the other by Aceto and coworkers in Naples, Italy). Although the two groups worked separately, they independently came to the same conclusion: that Orchis in the traditional sense is composed of three unrelated groups, and that some Orchis species needed to be transferred to Anacamptis and to Neotinea. This example highlights what promises to become a recurring theme in our reclassification of orchids: superficial similarities in floral morphology (resulting from convergent pollination syndromes) may be highly misleading of phylogenetic relationships. Some people will be displeased by having to re-learn the names of familiar genera and species as our classifications are restructured to mirror natural evolutionary units, but this brief period of upheaval should result in a much more stable and predictive system that will withstand future scientific scrutiny.

The remainder of the volume begins the generic treatments, beginning with the Apostasioideae and Cypripedioideae. Each generic treatment includes sections on nomenclature and synonymy, derivation of the name, description, distribution, infrageneric classification, anatomy, palynology, cytogenetics, phylogenetics, ecology, pollination biology, economic


70

uses, and cultivation. The multi-authored nature of the work is retained even at the generic level; for example, the treatments of Cypripedium and Paphiopedilum contain sections written by Cribb, Pridgeon, Cox, and three other authors. Cladograms chosen from recent literature summarize the molecular data that serve to support or refute the various schemes (Cribb's system is most congruent with the DNA data, in case you're wondering!). There are no keys or detailed descriptions of species-- such detail is beyond the stated scope of the series and would undoubtedly be premature for the vast majority of orchid genera. The editors should be commended for the remarkable task of bringing together so many different collaborators for this series, and Alec Pridgeon deserves special recognition for the ultimate responsibility of collecting and coordinating various authors' contributions. The second volume (to be published this year) will be of special interest to lovers of terrestrial orchids; it will treat the Orchidoideae, which now includes the spiranthoid clade and most terrestrial groups. These are exciting times to be studying orchids! Mark Whitten Senior Biological Scientist Florida Museum of Natural History University of Florida P.O. Box 117800 Gainesville, FL 32611-7800 Email: [email protected]


71

Schiedeella arizonica Arizona red-spot ladies'-tresses Photos by Ron Coleman

Plate 1: Brown/Coleman: SCHIEDEELLA ARIZONICA


72

pink lady's-slipper , Cypripedium acaule natural light, late p.m., blue cast from shade P.E. Keenan

Epidendrum amphistomum forma rubrifolium dingy epidendrum, red-leaved form Fakahatchee Swamp, Florida P.M. Brown

Plate 2 - Keenan: CYPRIPEDIUM Brown: FLORIDA


73

Pteroglossapsis ecristata forma flava crestless plume orchid yellow form J. & R. Lassiter

Corallorhiza wisteriana forma rubra Wister's coralroot red form P.M. Brown

Plate 3 - Brown: FLORIDA


74

top left: Spiranthes xfolsomii (S. odorata x S. longilabris) top right: Listera australis forma scottii bottom left: Listera australis forma viridis P.M. Brown



march 2000 north american native orchid journal

Documents