20 'JIIK JOURNAL OF BOTANT 



EPIPACTIS VIRIDIFLORA Reichb. 

 Bv C. E. Salmon, F.L.S. 



Dttbing the past summer I have had the opportunity of examin- 

 ing, in the counties of East and West Gloucester (v.c. 33 & 34) and 

 Monmouth (v.c. 35), a large number of living plants of an Epipactis 

 which can only be placed under the above. In spite of much varia- 

 tion in stature (18 to 75 cm.) and shape of leaf, yet the structure of 

 the reproductive organs of the flower and the form of the epichile 

 remained constant and pointed to Reichenbach's species. 



It was evident at once that the plants, which invariably grew in 

 woodland and were in their prime the latter half of July, could not 

 be placed under either of the two forms, dunensis or vectensis, on 

 account of their taller growth, more robust habit, larger and broader 

 leaves, longer bracts, and more numerous, larger, and more open 

 flowers. Indeed, from Messrs. Wheldon & Travis's careful descrip- 

 tion (Journ. Bot. 1913, 343) of the sand-dune plant and from 

 an examination of dried material, it seems that this might rank at 

 least as a good sound variety rather than a forma as suggested 

 by Messrs. Stephenson. Col. Godfery goes further and says (Journ. 

 Bot. 1919, 38) : " I am inclined to think that dunensis lias gone 

 far on the road towards differentiation as a species." On the other 

 hand, it is quite possible that forma vectensis may prove to be a name 

 covering small weak examples of type viridiflora itself. 



Upon comparing my plants with Col. Godfery's excellent descrip- 

 tion {I. c.) of his var. leptochila and with Surrey specimens. 1 was 

 convinced that these West Country examples should be placed under 

 his plant, though differing from it in a few minor details. He care- 

 fully distinguishes his variety from type viridiflora, and emphasizes 

 the following points I had particularly noted in the living plants : — 

 The tall robust stems, sometimes clustered (I saw five together in one 

 spot), the ovate (sometimes almost orbicular) lower leaves, and the 

 large open flowers (rivalling those of violacea) sometimes faintly 

 tinged with purple. My plants possessed almost invariably a notice- 

 ably long lower bract, leaf-like in form. G. F. Hoffmann (Deutsch. 

 Fl. 182, 1804) described his Serapias viridiflora as having bracts 

 longer than flowers, and Fl. Dan. v. t. 811 and Dietr. Fl. Boruss. viii. 

 t. 509 show this feature, but not so pronounced as in my examples. 

 In some specimens the sepals were much broader and less acuminate 

 than one would expect in any form of viridiflora (c. 14 mm. long by 

 G mm. broad) ; it is possible that these were hybrids with E. latifolia 

 which grew with them. The epichiles of the plants examined were 

 fairly uniform in shape and match well f. 2 of t. 555 in this 

 Journal, Sept. 1920 ; the hunches were two (with occasionally a 

 small median one), more or less smooth in freshly-opened flowers, 

 becoming more rugose as the blossoms aged. 



As regards the reproductive organs, a sketch made on the spot of 

 a side view exactly matches the drawing A 1 in Plate 553 (op. at. 

 Feb.); it was clear that the rostellum was, for all practical purposes, 

 useless, as in no case could one extract the pollinia upon the point of 

 a pencil as can be done so readily in the ease of E. latifolia. Self- 

 fertilisation was a eertaintv. 



