482- 



OECHiDACE^. [Hahenaria. 



p'vpn ^t\^^' ''"■^S^S^"? "ifi pollen-masses quite out of their cells, and this happens 

 even m the yet unexpanded flowers. ^^ 



^pp,itl'^ '^''■j ''f«'^'''<aWe, as having flowers in five nearly equal divisions, quite 



lowp r^ t" j"*^**^ "'^'^ '''''^^"' *^ '"*-^''*' 1"='"'^ °°t connivent but spreading, 

 wer iip broad, plane, and the spur entirely wanting;. Of this monstrosity I had 

 pieviuusiy seen a dried specimen, in the possession of Miss G. Kilderbee from 

 ine same station, and was at a loss what species to consider it. Mr. Stock, of Bun- 

 mid I ''^"^'"^^^ " similar alteration of structure in the flowers of Orchis pi/ra- 



3. H. Ufolia, Bab. Lesser Butterfly Orchis. " Inner sepals 

 connivent obtuse, spur twice as long as the germen, lip linear 

 entire obtuse, anther oblong-truncate, its cells parallel."— 5r. Fl. 

 ^^9. Bah. Linn. Trans, xvii. p. 463, and E. B. Su-ppl. t. 2806 

 ^U7-t. Br. Entom. v. t. etfol. 233 (opt.) Fl. Dan. fasc. xl. t. 20360 

 and 20361. Plat. solsitiaUs, Drejer. 



In barren woods, thickets and open heathy places, on a damp, meagre, stiif soil ; 

 uoi common, and T think probably only a more contracted form of the plant last 

 described, i^/. May.? June. I^. 



E Med. —In Stioud wood, by Aldermoor, near Ryde, not scarce, 1838. 



W. Med.—Co\vie\\ heath, 1841, two specimens. 



The difference between the present and preceding species has been ably illus- 

 trated hy Mr. Babington in the works above quoted. The great characteristic of 

 the plant now described is the parallelism of the anther-cells, more closely 

 approximated at their base than those of H. chlorantha are at the summit of 

 theirs ; hence the flowers of our present species are much narrower th;in the blos- 

 soms of H. chlorantha, and far less handsome and conspicuous. The anther is 

 shorter, the petals narrower ; the two lateral connivent ones, with the lip, spur and 

 summit of the anther are of a greenish or herbaceous colour, scarcely observable 

 in the almost pure white flowers of H. chlorantha ; the spur is mole slender, 

 hardly thicker than packthread, cylimlrical, scarcely clavate, and hardly at all 

 compressed as in H. chlorantha, much more horizontally porrected and straighter, 

 whereas in that species it is constantly strongly bent downwards and curved out- 

 wards, besides being visibly enlarged and clavate towards the extremity and much 

 flattened. The lateral calyx- segments are simply spreading, and rather curved 

 forwards or slightly connivent than reflexed, which is their general tendency in 

 ff. chlorantha, and every part of the present plant is smaller. The scent of both 

 is highly and delicately fragi'ant, particularly towards evening and at night.* 



The plates of Platanthera solsitiaUs of Drejer, Fl. Dan. xl. t. 20360 and 20361, 

 appear to favour the opinion of the learned Sir William Hooker, that both are 

 extreme forms of the same plant, as those figures represent a plant having as 

 much at least of the habit of H. chlorantha as of H. bifolia. 



I suspect H. bifolia is the sole, or at least the prevailing, species in the N. of 

 Europe, and that our H. chlorantha is the more frequent in the central or southern 

 parts. It is to be regretted tliat the confusion in which these two plants have 

 been involved should have settled the trivial name chlorantha (greenish yellow 

 flower) upon the one least deserving of that appellation. The concluding remarks 

 of Sir James Smith on Orchis bifolia, in his ' English Flora,' evince the very lit- 

 tle attention he paid to our present plant even as a variety, though distinctly 

 noticed hy so many of the older botanists. The figure in Br. Entom. admirably 

 represents the parallelism of the anther-cells. 



* The smell of the flowers of H. chlorantha is by some persons compared to 

 that of scented soap. 



