50 



MEMOIRS OF THE NEW YORK BOTANICAL GARDEN 



[VOL. 10 



Standley (Field Mus. Publ. Bot. 18: 143. 1937) apparently followed Engler 

 ( Pflanzenreich 4 23B : 125. 1908) in citing the range of this species to include 

 Guatemala, and in 1944 (Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 31: 36) wrote: "The writer 

 strongly suspects that 8. phryniifolium is a synonym of 8. friedrichsthalii, 

 and certainly the differences suggested for separating the two species are not 

 convincing." This opinion is contrary to my observations. Standley then 

 illustrated 8. friedrichsthalii from Allen 203, a collection with biovulate locules 

 which, although slightly aberrant in appearance, possibly represents 8. phrynii- 

 folium. He did not cite this collection under either species! Despite the alleged 

 lack of difference between the two species, Standley continued to accept his 

 earlier-described 8. zetekianum, which I consider to be only a very young plant, 

 possibly of 8. phryniifolium. 



The specimens that agree most closely with the type collection are from iso- 

 lated areas — the off-shore Perlas Archipelago in the Gulf of Panama, and the 

 distant Costa Rican province of Guanacaste, some 200 miles to the west of the 

 type locality. The collections from the Canal Zone and from intermediate points 

 show some variation from the typical form, with leaves proportionally a little 

 wider. There are indications that a smaller form may occur in some intermediate 

 localities. Nonetheless, there seems little doubt that the specimens referred to 

 8. phryniifolium represent one fairly uniform species. 



The type specimen of 8. zetekianum (Starry 27) is obviously a juvenile plant. 

 Its oldest leaf and the flowers approach the form found in this species. Killip 

 3639, with its narrow leaves, may be non-representative of this taxon, and Terry 

 1525 is questionably referred here ; yet the uniovulate locules of their ovaries 

 furnish a sound basis for referring them to 8. phryniifolium. 



The possible conspecificity of this species and 8. lanceaefolium has been con- 

 sidered. Since the latter species is incompletely known, each .is recognized as a 

 separate taxon. 



EXCLUDED OR DUBIOUS NAMES 



Leucochlamys callacea Poepp. ex Engl, in DC. Monogr. Phan. 2: 230. 1879, 

 nomen, as synonym of Spathiphyllum eannac folium. 



Massowia marginata C. Koch ex Ender, Index Aroid. 53. 1864, nomen ; — Spa- 

 thiphyllum cochlearispathum f 



Pothos odorata Anderson ex Dryand. Bot. Mag. 17: pi. 603. 1803, nomen, as 

 synonym of Spathiphyllum cannae folium . 



Spathiphyllum beccari Engl. Bui. Soc. Tosc. Otic. 4: 268. 1879; = Holo- 

 chlmnys beccarii Engl. Becc. Malesia 1: 265. 1883. 



S. caudatum Poepp. & Endl. Nova Gen. Sp. PI. 3 : 85. pi. 296. 1845 ; = Urosj^atha 

 caudatum (Poepp. & Engl.) Schott, Aroid. 1: 3. pi. 8. 1853. 



S. X hybridum N. E. Br. (S. cannaefolium X 8. patinii) 111. Hortic. 29: 75, 76. 

 1882. Originated in cultivation; its persistence today is unknown. 



S. marginatum C. Koch, Bonplandia 4: 12. 1856, nomen ; = 8. cochlearispathum ? 



S. pictum Bull, Catalogue 13, with pi. 1874; = f 



S. pictum Nichols, Diet. Gard. 3: 467. 1887; = Rhodospatha picta Nichols ? 

 S. sagittifolium Schott, Melet. Bot. 1: 22. 1832; = TJrospatha sagittae folium 



Schott, Aroid. 1: 4. 1853. 

 S. sagittaefolium Spruce ex Engl, in DC. Monogr. Phan. 3: 279. 1879, nomen, 



as synonym of TJrospatha spruceanum Schott, Bonplandia 5: 128. 1857. 

 S. wallisii Hort. Veitch. Gard. Chron. II. 3: 558. 1875; = Stcnospcrmatium 



popayenense Schott var. wallisii (Mast.) Engl, in Pflanzenreich 4 23B : 88. 1908. 



