statement: “‘Pfl. zur Bliitezeit und warscheinlich iiber- 
haupt blattlos, in ihrem Aufbau noch ungeniigend be- 
kannt.’’ As he restricted the genus to the Australasian 
species, it would seem that he intended to exclude from 
Dipodium the Malayan species with lateral flower-shoots 
(plants clearly referable to the Acrotonae-Pleuranthae ) 
and to recognize for their reception the genus Wailesia. 
Perhaps, as Pfitzer implied, the vegetative structure of 
Dipodium, as represented by 2. punctatum and D. 
squamatum, is in need of further elucidation. However, 
as long ago as 1862, H. G. Reichenbach (in Xenia Orch- 
idacea 2 (1862) 15, t. 107) attempted a classification of 
the then known species (taking Dipodium in its broadest 
sense to include Wailesia), and in his key to the genus 
established two groups: one characterized by a terminal 
inflorescence, including D. punctatum and D. squama- 
tum; the other characterized by a lateral inflorescence, 
including D. paludosum and D. pictum. He published a 
very accurate illustration of D. squamatum and showed 
clearly what he interpreted as a terminal inflorescence. 
Infortunately the specimens of J. squamatum and 
D. punctatum found in herbaria are usually incomplete 
and appear to be broken where they emerge from the 
ground, yet it is difficult to understand why Pfitzer, rely- 
ing on vegetative characters, should have regarded these 
species as members of his Acrotonae-Pleuranthae. 
If Dipodium is accepted in the modern sense to in- 
clude the species formerly referred to Wailesia (on floral 
structures it is evident that these genera are closely re- 
lated and doubtfully separable) it should be emphasized 
that the Australasian species, J. punctatum and D. 
squamatum, constitute an exception to the generic char- 
acters of Dipodium based on a lateral flower-shoot and 
are in the same category with several other genera of the 
Orchidaceae, such as Dendrochilum and some of the ab- 
[ 37 ] 
