of the column, however, this genus is widely divergent 
from the Tropidieae. In Palmorchis the anther is not 
erect on the back of the column, nor are the pollinia 
distinctly powdery as in the Tropidieae; but the anther 
is incumbent lying on the rostellum on the anterior face 
of the column and the pollinia appear to be more or less 
waxy or at least not readily pulveraceous. 
According to Schlechter (Das System der Orchid- 
aceen, in Notizbl. Bot. Gart. Berlin 9 (1926) 568), the 
genera Rolfea and Neobartlettia {| = Palmorchis] fall into 
the Polychondreae (with soft, granular pollinia) and then 
into the subtribe Tropidieae. In this treatment, Schlechter 
makes the error of including the concepts Folfea and 
Neobartlettia (with incumbent anthers) in the group with 
Tropidia and Corymborchis which have erect anthers. 
Of even more basic importance, it seems to us, the con- 
cept Palmorchis, as represented by Rolfea Powellui, has 
pollinia which are not powdery as in the Tropidieae but 
are somewhat waxy or at least not readily pulveraceous. 
On this basis, following Schlechter’s system, the genus 
Palmorchis should be referred to the tribe Kerosphaereae 
and then to the subtribe Liparideae. But obviously the 
genera of the Liparideae are widely dissimilar to the con- 
cept Palmorchis. 
In 1937, Mansfeld (Uber das System der Orchidaceae- 
Monandrae, in Notizbl. Bot. Gart. Berlin 13, p. 666) 
excluded Rolfea and Neobartlettia from the Tropidiinae 
(or Tropidieae). He placed them in the tribe Kerosphae- 
reae, and then with some uncertainty in the subtribe 
Sobraliinae. 
It thus appears that, whatever system of classification 
we attempt to use, Palmorchis occupies an uncertain 
position. The genus seems to stand alone and we propose 
for it the subtribal name Palmorchideae to be placed in 
the proximity of the Liparideae. 
[ 111 ] 
