LiMNORCHIS AND PiPERIA NORTH OF MeXICO Oil 



//. Coopcri Wats. /. c. is not a LiuinorcJds, but a Pipcria. 



//. gracilis Wats, is not the same as PlatantJicra i^raci/is Liiid- 

 le}', but P. stricta of the same author. 



Kraenzlin's treatment in his Orchidaccannn Genera et Species 

 is altogether unsatisfactory. He admits only two species, Platan- 

 tJicra gracilis and P. hypcrborea, the latter with several varieties. 



His P. gracilis is, however, not P. gracilis Lindley but Habe- 

 naria gracilis Wats. {P. stricta Lindl.). 



Under P. liypcrborca a var. gejinina he cites naturally also 

 Habenaria borcalis (i viridiflora Cham, as a synonym, but he has 

 printed viridis instead of viridiflora. I take this, however, as a 

 distinct species. 



P. convallariacfolia he has reduced to a variety, P. hypcrborea 

 /5 var, convallariacfolia. In the same manner, he calls //. ddatata, 

 y var. dilatata Lindl. (I do not think that Lindley ever made it a 

 variety ; Kraenzlin is very loose in citing authorities.) Under this 

 variety he has as synonyms among others : Platanthcra Hiironcnsis 

 Lindl., Habenaria pedicellata S. Wats., H. Cooperi S. Wats., P. 

 <rravnnea and P. borcalis Reichenb. Of these the last named is the 

 only one, that can be referred here with any reason, for that, which 

 is the same as Habenaria borcalis Cham., belongs to the dilatata 

 group, while P. Hiironcnsis belongs to the hypcrborea group and H. 

 pedicellata and H. Cooperi belong to distinct genera. 



Under his o var. leiicostachys he has as synonyms besides P: 

 Iciicostachys Lindl., also Habenaria brcvifolia Greene, P. GJiies- 

 brechtiana Rich. & Gal., P. sparsiJloraS. Wats., P. Thurbcriv. Grayi 

 S. Wats, and H.flagcllaris S. Wats. Of these Habenaria brcvifolia 

 Greene and H. sparsifiora S. Wats, can under no conditions be 

 referred to //. Iciicostachys on account of their broad connective. 

 The habit of H. birvifolia alone should throw it out ; there is 

 scarcely a more distinct species in the whole family. As far as 

 H. sparsifiora S. Wats, is concerned, it would have been more rea- 

 sonable to refer that species to his H. gracilis, i. e., H. stricta Lindl.; 

 the habit and lip in the two are the same and the flowers have some 

 resemblance. The main difference is in the spur and the connective.' 

 It is also to be noticed that Watson never published any Platan- 

 thcra sparsifiora but a Habenaria sparsifiora, nor any var. Grayi of 

 either Platanthcra or Habenaria Thurberi. In the citation of the 



