THE ORCHID REVIEW. . 239 
other, with larger flowers. This is the inferior sort.” The latter was based 
on a wild specimen collected at Mal Pais, Guatemala, by Skinner, and if the 
variety was ever in cultivation, as Lindley’s remark would seem to infer, he 
did not preserve a specimen. Some plants that we have seen in gardens 
called O. sphacelatum majus do not agree with the original plant. Mr. 
Lynch, however, has now sent to Kew a spray, received from a correspondent 
at Cambridge, which does agree with it. It is a most handsome form, 
having the lip three-quarters of an inch broad, and the isthmus measures 
five lines broad. It will probably thrive under the same treatment as the 
type, which succeeds well in a warm house. 
R.A.R. 
FAILURES IN HYBRIDISATION. 
Mr. OrpET’s failure to obtain capsules of hybrid seed on Epidendrum 
radicans, “though all kinds of pollen available were used” (page 202), confirms 
the experience of Messrs. James Veitch & Sons with this species (see page 
274 of our fifth volume), and it would be interesting to know the exact cause 
of this failure. In view of the fact that the species is a good pollen parent, we 
have suggested that the difficulty may be a mechanical one ; that the pollen 
tubes of the large flowered Cattleyas and Lzelias are too large to effect an 
entrance to the micropyle of the Epidendrum ovule; but this would not 
account for the failure to “ set,” because fertilisation proper does not take 
place till the capsule is of considerable size. 
Sophronitis grandiflora, on the other hand, has long been known asa 
bad pollen parent, and Mr. Hurst has a note on the subject in a recent 
paper (Journ. Roy. Hort. Soc., xxiv., p. 125). “Incompatibility of 
structure,” he remarks, “apart altogether from systematic affinity, may 
have something to do with the limitation of crossing, for I observe in the 
above experiments (some of his own) that in all the instances where 
Sophronitis was crossed with Cattleya, when Sophronitis was the seed 
parent, good seeds were obtained, which duly germinated, while the reverse 
crosses, made at the same time and under the same conditions, in every 
case failed to set a capsule. Now Sophronitis has a very short column, 
while Cattleya has a decidedly long one, and one can quite understand that, 
while it would be an easy matter for the pollen tubes of Cattleya to reach 
the ovules of Sophronitis, yet, on the other hand, it would be much more 
difficult for the pollen tubes of Sophronitis to reach the ovules of Cattleya, 
owing to the length of the column duct in the latter.” 
It would be interesting to know the real cause of these peculiarities, and 
microscopical examination of the growth of the pollen tubes might throw: 
further light on the question. 
