114 
2° Gynostemium without any differentiation whatever. 
3° Flower according to Mr. Smith remained closed; slight 
differentation of the gynostemium. 
4° From the back of the gynostemium springs a petaloid 
organ, probably the transformed stamen A’. 
5° Flower without gynostemium. 
6° Gynostemium with petaloid borders (stamens 1 and 22). 
7 The whole flower reduced to a thread. 
8° idem. 
9° Flower quite closed without gynostemium. 
10° idem. 
11° Flower closed with gynostemium and long twisted pol- 
linia on it. 
From this account it appears that the utmost reductions 
of the tetramerous flowers are possible. But a peculiarity 
to which especial attention may be drawn is that in one of 
the specimens of the Orchid-garden the tetramerous flowers 
were not found wader the hexamerous ones, as has always been 
the case up to now, but amongst them. 
Grammatophyllum seriptum. In June 1895 I received from Bui- 
tenzorg a beautiful regularly constructed flower of a Gram- 
matophyllum, which according to the opinion of Mr. Smith 
may be a variety of the Species scriptum. It is a native of 
Menado (Celebes). The flower appears tetramerous , but on exa- 
mination turns out to be reduced in the same way as the 
above speciosum. The gynostemium is fully developed and 
bears a polliniferous anther and a little lower, a stigma- 
cavity. The inferior sepal is actually the product of two 
sepals, a labellum is wanting and of the ovary there is not 
even a rudiment. The flower was the lowermost of an inflor- 
escence which was normal in other respects, and therefore 
shows a remarkable analogy with deviations of Gr. speciosum ?). 
1) On two flowering specimens of Gr, Rumphianum in one of the hothouses in 
Kew Gardens I observed some days ago the same deviation, viz. a few tetramerous 
flo wers at the base of the flowerstalk, Aug. 1895. 
