would, were he unmindful of the significance of resupi- 
nation, conclude that it must be specifically distinet from 
an exotic though similar species with a non-resupinate, 
erect labellum. I would have no intention of taking ex- 
ception to the proposals of Professor Fernald, if his con- 
clusions were supported by all the evidence. He has 
reinstated Microstylis brachypoda to emphasize what he 
regards as a long overlooked difference between the A- 
merican and Eurasian plants which have been prevalently 
referred to Malaxis monophyllos.’ (cf. Rhodora 28 (1926) 
176) In their vegetative and floral structure these plants 
are perplexingly alike. Professor Fernald’s statement in 
Rhodora (l.c. p. 92) leaves no doubt as to what he re- 
garded as the most important differentiating character. 
He wrote: ‘‘Most significant is the fact that the Eurasian 
plant has the flowers resupinate or up-side-down, so that 
the lip points up; while in the plants of eastern America 
the flowers are in normal position with drooping lip.’” It 
is quite evident that Professor Fernald uses the word 
resupinate incorrectly and in a sense very different from 
that understood by orchidologists and plant morpholo- 
gists, and he has misinterpreted the behavior of the pedicel 
in the American plant although he used this structure in 
establishing a specific difference. The flowers of the Ku- 
rasian plant are not ‘‘upside-down”’ nor are the flowers 
of the American plant ‘“‘normal’’ in having a ‘‘drooping 
lip’’. The American plant has a resupinate or abaxial per- 
ianth, whereas the perianth of the Eurasian plant is non- 
resupinate or adaxial.* 
5 In Rhodora 28 (1926) 92, Professor Fernald stated that I had ig- 
nored Microstylis brachypoda Gray in my Enumeration of the Orchids 
of the United States and Canada. In the Preface I made it clear that 
a complete synonymy would burden the text. 
* James Edward Smith, in Smith and Sowerby’s English Botany, 
used the term *‘resupinata’’ in describing the position of the *‘unpaired 
sepal’’ in the flower of Malazis paludosa. He referred to this sepal as 
being ‘‘lowermost’’, assuming, also erroneously, that in the Orchid- 
aceae the flowers are in their primitive position when the unpaired se- 
pal is uppermost and the labellum lowermost. (cf. text cut on p. 154) 
[ 170 ] 
