\ 
\ 
GENERA MICROSTYLIS AND MALAXIS. ` 309 
- Liparis resembling each other in vegetative organs. Thus, in 
the Himalayan Mountains we have Liparis atropurpurea, with a 
swollen stem covered with pale sheaths, and terminated by a tuft 
of thin membganous leaves, as in Microstylis Wallichii from the 
same region. Liparis elliptica has a solitary, erect, oblong leaf, 
and a short stem with an abruptly swollen pseudobulb, very 
similar to that of Microstylis calycina. Still more striking are 
the resemblances between Liparis acutissima and Microstylis 
Godefroye, both from Siam; Liparis purpurascens from Mada- 
gascar and Microstylis stelidostachya from the Comoro Islands ; 
Liparis brachystaliz and Microstylis caulescens from the Andes 
of Ecuador. So peculiar are some of the modifications, that it is 
often possible to guess from vegetative characters alone from 
which region a plant has come. The section Corüfolie of 
Liparis is, however, not at all represented in Microstylis. I am 
inclined to think that Oberonia, which occurs over the same region 
as the thick-leaved Liparids, takes its place. 
Androchilus, a monotypic genus from Mexico, described by 
Liebmann in ‘ Forh. Skand. Naturf. Möde,’ iv. p. 197, is referred 
by Mr. Bentham (Gen. Plant., Addenda, p. 1225) to the genus 
Liparis without his having seen a type-specimen ; but on reading 
carefully the author’s long description, it seems to me that the 
plant intended was one of the Neottieæ. For I do not know any 
Malaxideous plant that has a pubescent scape, ovary, and bracts 
or linear clavate pollinia, or a fasciculated root, while adnation or 
connivence of the posticous sepal with the petals is at least 
extremely rare, and possibly only accidental in this group. All 
these characters, however, are common in the JVeottiee ; while the 
peculiar structure of the stamens as described by Liebmann may 
be due to a misinterpretation of the anther of such a plant as 
Spiranthes. Gastroglottis, Blume (Bijdr. p. 397), may possibly 
belong to this section of plants; but his description is quite in- 
sufficient to determine what was intended, and I have seen no 
type. G. montana, Kuhl and Hasselt, in Reichb. f. Xenia Orch. 
ii. p. 96, t. 129, seems certainly no Malaxid, but more resembles 
Pholidota. 
MICROSTYLIS. 
The habit of a typical Microstylis is, as has been said, very 
much that of a typical Liparis. There is a shorter or longer 
