to be about 8.5 em. long and 2.8—8.2 cm. wide, whereas 
those of W. tricolor are described as 2—2.5 em. long and 
1.2-2 cm. wide. The sepals and petals of W. speciosa are 
described as obtuse, but they are figured as more or less 
ucute—as they are in W. tricolor. Moreover, the seg- 
ments of W.. speciosa, as depicted, appear to be almost 
an exact counterpart of those which Cogniaux attributes 
to W. tricolor. Finally, the anterior part of the lip of 
W. tricolor (as Mawillaria Warreana) is traversed by 
verrucose fleshy lines as attributed to W. speciosa. 
Apparently there is no morphological difference be- 
tween the two concepts, but only a discrepancy in size. 
Size appears to be less important as a differentiating 
character since the flowers of a Peruvian specimen (W7/- 
liams 73838) which I have examined are intermediate be- 
tween the two concepts. 
Eriopsis biloba Lindley in Bot. Reg. 38 (1847) t. 
18—Cogniaux in Martius FI. Bras. 8, pt. 5 (1902) 586. 
-*seuderiopsis Schomburghkiu (as Shomburgkii) Reichen- 
bach filius in Linnaea 22 (1849) 853. 
Eriopsis Schomburghu Reichenbach filius in Bonpl. 3 
(1855) 67. 
Kriopsis Wercklet Schlechter in Fedde Repert. 16 
(1920) 447. 
A eareful examination of the Costa Rican J7rvopsis 
Wercklei, as represented by an analytical drawing of the 
type made under the supervision of Dr. Schlechter, as 
well as by authentic material in the Ames Herbarium, 
show that this concept is referable to HW. biloba, which is 
well illustrated and described. Apparently the only dis- 
crepancy between these concepts is that #. Werckler is 
said to have longer leaves than £. biloba. Sometimes, 
also, the sepals and petals of H. Werckleit are slightly 
larger than those attributed to 2. biloba. 
[ 190 | 
