350 



2. Red tentacles, white labellum with deep crimson divergent 

 lines on lamina; calli fleshy and thick with a tendency to 

 become imbricated. Flower sometimes wholly red. 3. 

 Flower considerably smaller than either of the preceding, 

 wholly crimson or red ; calli more definitely linear, with no 

 tendency to become imbricate. 



The first two appear to be morphologically identical. In 

 the third in addition to the differences referred to, there 

 appears to be also a difference in the shape of the labelliim. 

 It is very doubtful, however, whether this is a specific 

 difference, and for the present it would seem desirable to 

 include the three under the same specific name. 



Occasionally this species may be found with four rows of 

 calli. In such circumstances the plant is unusually large and 

 robust. 



It has been customary to regard G. tentaculata, Tate, as 

 distinct from C . filament osa. The morphological differences 

 are, however, too slight to constitute valid grounds for a 

 separation, and Tate's species should therefore be considered 

 merely as another of those colour variations to whick 

 filamentosa is subject. 



G. Patersoni, Br. 



Brown's description is unfortunately of too general a 

 nature to exclude certain other filamentous Galadenias which 

 should be known under a different name. Added to this, 

 there are real structural difficulties connected with the 

 polymorphic group to which it belongs, the members of which 

 are often linked together by intermediate forms and thas 

 pass, almost imperceptibly, the one into the other. Henfce it 

 has become the botanical dumping-ground for almost every 

 Caladenia with caudate sepals, clavate or otherwise. Natural 

 hybridism is undoubtedly responsible for some of this 

 confusion, perhaps for more than is suspected. 



In the consideration of this species it is necessary to 

 remember that Brown derived his material from Tasmania. 

 An examination of a large collection of caudate Galadenias 

 from the Island reveals one which is very common there, and 

 which must have claimed Brown's attention at the time of his 

 visit. This is fairly well illustrated in Hooker's Fl. Tas., ii., 

 t. 123, under the title of G . Patersoni, and the drawing may 

 be accepted as a correct interpretation of Brown's species. 

 There would therefore appear to be no practical difficulty in 

 identification of the typical form which Brown had before 

 him when he wrote his description. This plant is not so robust 

 as many of those which bear the specific name on the main- 

 land. The flowers are commonly solitary, but are sometimes 

 two in number and very rarely three. They are usually white 



