KUNGL. SV'. VET. AK.\DF,MIRNS HANDLINGAR. BAND 50. N:0 3. 23 



made by Mr, Finet), I think that Kränzlin's A. platyantha consists of tvvo dif- 

 ferent species. 



W. F., Wright! Chartres! Abbot, Firmin ex C. H. Wright; Shallow Bay 

 (Mrs Vallentin 35 a!) — Fuegia (Racovitza, Dusen, whose specimen was used for 

 the drawing on plate I.) 



Clilorfea Lindl. 



34. C. Gaudicliaiulii Brongn. (Arethusa lutea d'Urv. C. falklandica Kränzl.) 

 — Pl. I, Fig. 7-10. 



The plants I liave collected coincide very well witli this species, as described 

 by Brongniart, whose original description is reproduced by Lindley, Gen. et spec. 

 Orch. p. 405, and by Kränzltn. Under the name of Arethusa lutea Gaud., d'Urville 

 (p. 604) describes the same species. A. lutea Gaud. Flore p. 101 and Freyc. Voy. 

 Bot. p. 133 is generally quoted as belonging to the same; but Persoon's Serapias 

 lutea is certainly an Asarca, according to Lindley i. c. = A. Commersonii. Professor 

 Kränzlin described Chlorcea falklandica on my material. In Orchid. gen. et spec. 

 II. 1 he classifies Chlorcea Gaudichaudii as a species incertae sedis, that he had never 

 seen, but as it had been described from the Falklands, and was the only Chlorcea 

 known from this place, it seems stränge, that he never thought of it. My specimens 

 are identical with those in the Kew Herbarium. 



If we compare the descriptions and figures of C. Gaudichaudii (2, tab. 44 A) 

 and C. falklandica (Pl. I), there are indeed no essential differences between them. 

 Brongniart describes the labellum as »subtrilobum», but Kränzlin ]. c, who has 

 seen the figures in Lindley's herbarium, states that »simplex» would be more justi- 

 fied. Unfortunality, he seems to ha ve overlooked d' Ur ville' s notes on the colour 

 and shape of the flower, for that author writes »labello subaequali», i. e. of nearly 

 the same form as the other tepals. Fig. 9 b on pla,te clearly shows, I think, how 

 Brongniart came to use the term »subtrilobum». Though being comparatively large 

 (1,2—1,5 cm long) the flowers are very inconspicuous on account of their greenish 

 colour, so well described by d'Urville. 



C. Gaudichaudii Brongn. is related to C. Fonckii Phil. (incl. C. inconspicua 

 Phil.); but the latter has more acute sepals with incrassate apex, while on the 

 former they are quite membranous and only slightly convolute (Pl. I, 8 a, 9 a, 10 a), 

 but not or very little thickened; the labellum is of a dif ferent shape (see Kränzlin's 

 figures, tab. IX C, E, X B). In both species the flowers never open more than is 

 seen on pl. I, fig. 7, they are cleistogamous. 



Not uncommon: W. F., Wright, Chartres! Mrs. Vallentin, 54 p, p. ! Roy 

 Cove (Vallentin ex Wright); Shallow Bay (Mrs. Vallentin 34 a!) E. F., Gaudi- 

 chaud, d'Urville, Hooker! Port Stanley! Sparrow Cove! between Darwin and 

 Mount Pleasant (Dr. Foley!) — Endemic. 



