not illustrated, the color of the flowers and the general 
form of the floral segments of the two concepts, seem 
to be nearly identical. 
In the description of 7. grata, the pseudobulbs are 
said to be diphyllous, but it would seem that this char- 
acterization must be based either upon an error or upon 
an abnormality, because every example of Trichopilia 
noted has a 1-leaved pseudobulb. 
The two Peruvian collections cited below have uni- 
foliate pseudobulbs, and, except for the keel character 
above noted, have the same characters and measure- 
ments as 7'. fragrans. 
Cuzco: Prov. Quispicanchi, Marcapata Valley, evergreen hard- 
leaved bushwood consisting of shrubs and trees, at 1800 meters alti- 
tude, February 20, 1929, ‘‘ Labellum white with central yellow spot, 
the other tepals greenish,’’ 4. Weberbauer 7840. 
Junin: Rio Mantaro, “*1909-1914,’’ 4. Weberbauer 6582. 
Neodryas rhodoneura Reichenbach filius in Bot. 
Zeit. 10 (1852) 835; Xen. Orch. 1 (1854) 38, t. 16, figs. 
II 12-25. 
Neodryas Mandonii Reichenbach filius Xen. Orch. 3 
(1878) 21. 
Neodryas latilabia Smith & Harris in Contrib. Gray 
Herb. Harvard Univ. 117 (1987) 89, figs. a-c. 
Neodryas reniformis Smith & Harris in Contrib. Gray 
Herb. Harvard Univ. 117 (1987) 39, figs. d-g. 
An isotype of Neodryas Mandoniu (G. Mandon 1146) 
in the Gray Herbarium seems to be inseparable from NV. 
rhodoneura as represented by the detailed description 
and illustrations in Xen. Orch. 1, p. 88, t. 16, figs. The 
specimens of N. Mandoniu do not have a depressed- 
pyriform pseudobulb as described, but an oblong or py- 
riform-cylindric pseudobulb as illustrated for MN. rhodo- 
neura. The only significant difference between these 
concepts is that NM. Mandoni is described as having a 
{ 194 | 
