INTRODUCTION ix 



Under Addenda and Corrigenda on page 162, Dr. Kranzlin places 

 among the doubtful or insufficiently known species Acoridium Whit- 

 fordii Rolfe. 1 This species was clearly defined in the original descrip- 

 tion from material which, deposited in the Kew Herbarium, was not 

 beyond Dr. Kranzlin's reach. Dr. Kranzlin's objection to Mr. Rolfe's 

 reference to D. pumilum Reichb. f . as a near affinity is scarcely a valid 

 excuse for placing it among the little known or obscure species of the 

 genus. Even though there may be doubt as to the plant described by 

 Reichenbach as Dendrochilum pumilum, it yet remains for some one to 

 prove that Cuming's plant numbered 2102 from the Philippine Islands, 

 on which the description of D. pumilum was based, and of which number 

 there is a duplicate in the British Museum herbarium, 2 was a mixture. 



When cooperation and friendly correspondence are neglected by 

 workers in the same fields of systematic botany, confusion is the almost 

 inevitable result. On the other hand, it is quite improbable that coop- 

 eration will long continue when one worker appropriates the property 

 of his fellows and neglects the laws of courtesy. 



OAKES AMES. 



December 9, 1907. 



Corrections 



Dendrochilum anfractum Ames Orchidaceae fasc. 2, p. 12 = 2). anfractum 

 (Ames) Pfitzer Coelogyninae p. 118. — D. cucullatum Ames I. c. = D. cucidla- 

 tum (Ames) Pfitzer I. c. p. 98. — D. glumaceum var. validum Ames I. c. p. 112 = 

 D. glumaceum var. validum (Rolfe) Pfitzer & Kranzlin I. c. p. 105. — D. gra- 

 ciliscapum Ames I. c. p. 12 = D. graciliscapum (Ames) Pfitzer I. c. p. 99. — 

 D. graminifolium Ames I. c. = D. graminifolium (Ames) Pfitzer I. c. p. 114. — 

 D. longilabre Ames I. c. = D. longilabre (Ames) Pfitzer I. c. p. 99. — D. Merril- 

 lii Ames I. c. = D. Merrillii (Ames) Pfitzer I. c. p. 119. — D. ocellatum Ames 

 1. c. = D. ocellatum (Ames) Pfitzer I. c. p. 117. — D. oliganthum Ames I. c. = 

 D. oliganthum (Ames) Pfitzer I. c. p. 117. — D. philippinense Ames I. c. = D. 

 philippinense (Ames) Pfitzer I. c. p. 118. — D. parvidum Ames l.c. — D.par- 

 vulum (Ames) Pfitzer I. c. p. 116. — D. recurvum (Ames) Pfitzer I. c. p. 117 = 

 D. recurvum Ames Philipp. Journ. Sci. (Bot.) 2: 318 (July, 1907). — D. spha- 

 celatum Ames Orchidaceae I. c. = D. sphacelatum (Ames) Pfitzer I. c. 112. — D. 

 strictiforme Ames I. c. = D. strictiforme (Ames) Pfitzer I. c. p. 116. — D. tenel- 



1 D. Zollingeri Miquel j placed in the body of the Pfitzer-Kranzlin monograph although 

 admitted to be little known and doubtful ! J. J. Smith was not wholly satisfied concerning 

 its position in the genus. D. spathaceum Reichb. f. is also inadequately characterized in the 

 original description, and yet is not assigned to the little known or doubtful species by Pfitzer 

 & Kranzlin ! 



2 The illustration on page 94 of this volume is reproduced from a camera lucida drawing of 

 a flower from the plant in the British Museum kindly loaned to me by Dr. A. B. Rendle. 



