March 2000 North American Native Orchid Journal

NORTH AMERICAN
NATIVE ORCHID JOURNAL

______________________________________
Volume 6 March
Number 1 2000
a quarterly devoted to the orchids of North America
published by the
NORTH AMERICAN
NATIVE ORCHID ALLIANCE
* * * * * * *
* * * * * * *
IN THIS ISSUE:
SCHIEDEELLA ARIZONICA: A NEW SPECIES FROM
THE SOUTHWESTERN UNITED STATES
IN ANTICIPATION OF THE GROWING SEASON
A SHORT HISTORY OF THE GENUS CYPRIPEDIUM
RARE, THREATENED AND ENDANGERED
ORCHIDS IN NORTH AMERICA - Part 1……….and
more!
NORTH AMERICAN NATIVE
ORCHID JOURNAL
(ISSN 1084-7332)
published quarterly in
March June September December
by the
NORTH AMERICAN NATIVE ORCHID ALLIANCE
a group dedicated to the conservation and promotion of our
native orchids
Editor:
Paul Martin Brown
Assistant Editor: Nathaniel E. Conard
Editorial & Production Assistants:
Philip E. Keenan
Stan Folsom
Nancy Webb
The Journal welcomes articles, of any length, of both a scientific

and general interest nature relating to the orchids of North
America. Scientific articles should conform to guidelines such as
those in Lindleyana or Rhodora. General interest articles and notes
may be more informal. Authors may include line drawings
and/or black and white photographs. Color inserts may be
arranged. Please send all inquiries or material for publication to
the Editor at PO Box 772121, Ocala, FL 34477-2121 (late May -
early Oct. Box 759, Acton, ME 04001-0759).
2000 Membership in the North American Native Orchid Alliance,

which includes a subscription to the Journal, is $26 per year in the
United States, $29US in Canada and $32US other foreign
countries. Payment should be sent to Nancy A. Webb, 84 Etna
St., Brighton, MA 02135-2830. Claims for lost issues or canceled
memberships should be made to the editorial office within 30
days.
NORTH AMERICAN NATIVE
ORCHID JOURNAL
Volume 6 March
Number 1 2000
CONTENTS
NOTES FROM THE EDITOR
1
SCHIEDEELLA ARIZONICA: A NEW SPECIES FROM
THE SOUTHWESTERN UNITED STATES
Paul Martin Brown
with Ronald A. Coleman
3
IN ANTICIPATION OF THE GROWING SEASON
The Slow Empiricist
19
OCCURRENCE OF WILD COCO, EULOPHIA ALTA
(L.) Fawcett & Rendle, AT ROCK SPRINGS RUN STATE
RESERVE, ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA
Brian Emanuel, Jo Anna Watson Baber & Mike Beckwith
26
A SHORT HISTORY OF THE GENUS CYPRIPEDIUM
Phillip E. Keenan
29
FOR YOUR INFORMATION!
43
RARE, THREATENED AND ENDANGERED
ORCHIDS IN NORTH AMERICA - Part 1
Anne B. Wagner, Ken Wagner & Paul Martin Brown
44
5th ANNUAL NORTH AMERICAN NATIVE ORCHID
CONFERENCE
60
RECENT TAXONOMIC AND DISTRIBUTIONAL
NOTES FROM FLORIDA 5.
Paul Martin Brown
62
BOOK REVIEWS:
Genera Orchidacearum Volume 1
Mark Whitten
67
Unless otherwise credited, all drawings in this issue are by Stan Folsom
Color Plates:
Plate 1, page 71 - Schiedeella arizonica
Plate 2, page 72 - Cypripedium acaule; Epidendrum amphistomum forma rubrifolium
Plate 3, page 73 - Corallorhiza wisteriana forma rubra; Pteroglossapsis ecristata forma
flava
Plate 4, page 74 - Listera australis forma scottii; Listera australis forma viridis;
Spiranthes xfolsomii
The opinions expressed in the Journal are those of the authors. Scientific
articles may be subject to peer review and popular articles will be examined for
both accuracy and scientific content.
Volume 6, number 1, pages 1-74; issued March 20, 2000.
Copyright 2000 by the North American Native Orchid Alliance, Inc.
Cover: Prosthechea boothiana var. erythronioides by Stan Folsom
NOTES FROM THE EDITOR
With the beginning of the new century we enter

our sixth year of the Journal. This issue presents the first
of a four-part series on the rare, threatened and
endangered orchids of North America as well as several
new taxa. Research seems to be at a peak right now as
there are several more new taxa to come in the June
issues as well. September and December should have
proceedings from the conference in Washington this
summer. That is not to say that we do not need your
articles and observations. They are most important and
keep the Journal of interest to all.
Mailing and delivery seem to be continuing

problem and I will endeavor to send out replacement
issues as quickly as I can. Stan and I (and the animals)
will be leaving Florida for Maine about May 15th and
then plan to drive to the conference in early July. We
will be difficult to reach for most of July, but in the June
issue will give you an alternate telephone number where
you can at least leave an important message. Mail after
May 15th should be sent to PO Box 759, Acton, Maine
04001. We plan to return to Florida in early October.
Plans for the new Wild Orchids of Florida

field guide are well underway with a signed contract
1
with the University Press of Florida and potential
publication date of September 2001.
Paul Martin Brown

Editor
PO Box 772121
Ocala, FL 34477
352/861-2565
May 15 - October 1
PO Box 759
Acton, ME 04001
207/636-3719
naorchid@aol.com
2
Brown/Coleman: SCHIEDEELLA ARIZONICA
SCHIEDEELLA ARIZONICA: A NEW

SPECIES FROM THE SOUTHWESTERN
UNITED STATES
Paul Martin Brown
with Ronald A. Coleman1
This spiranthoid taxon from the southwestern

United States has long been accepted as Spiranthes
parasitica A. Rich. & Gal., or as Schiedeella parasitica (A.
Rich. & Gal.) Schlechter, and is illustrated in Luer
(1975) as such. In the years following Luer's publication
both the genus Schiedeella and the species parasitica have
been carefully re-examined (Burns-Balogh, 1989;
Szlachetko, 1991, 1992). Continued examination of this
taxon by Coleman and Brown warrants proposal of the
following:
Schiedeella arizonica P.M. Brown sp. nov. (Fig. 1, 2;

Pl. 1)
TYPE: USA, Arizona: Pima County. Marshall Gulch.
Santa Catalina Mountains. June 1906, J. J. Thornber 5563
(Holotype: ARIZ 12503)
1
All of the field work and the vast majority of the herbarium
citations were initially gathered by Ron Coleman. The
information was assembled and the text written by P.M. Brown.
3
(Photographs: NANOJ 2(2):127 (as S. fauci-sanguinea);

6(1):71; Luer, 1975, Nat. Orchids of the US & Can. ex Fl.
pg. 129, pl. 29 as Spiranthes parasitica; Liggio, 1999, Wild
Orchids of Texas pg. 157 (as Schiedeella parasitica).
similis Schiedeella fauci-sanguinea (Dod) Burns-Balogh, sed

divergens flora magniorum et labia 5.5-8 longa x 3.5
mm lata, apices dilatata cum labella 3-nervo viridis
Similar to Schiedeella fauci-sanguinea (Dod) Burns-Balogh,

but differing in larger flowers and with a lip 5.5-8 x 3.5
mm, broadest at the apex and with three prominent
green lines
PLANT: terrestrial herb, up to 20 cm in height, slender;

ROOTS: a thickened tuber to 2 cm long; LEAVES: 3-
5, deep green, petoliate, oval to 30 x 60 mm, arranged in
a basal rosette, withered at anthesis;
INFLORESCENSE: a slender greenish-yellow to rosy
stem with to 12 whitish flowers arranged in a slender,
loose, single ranked spiral, with several prominent stem
bracts to 15 mm in length; FLORAL BRACT:
lanceolate-acuminate, translucent white to 10 mm long;
OVARY: pubescent, green, to 5 mm long; DORSAL
SEPAL: oblong-obtuse, 5-7 x 1.5-2 mm. LATERAL
SEPALS: oblong-oblique, obtuse, 5-7 x 2 mm;
PETALS: spatulate, widest above the middle and
tapering to a narrow base, 4.5-5 x 1.5 mm. LIP: oblong,
5.5-8 x 3.5 mm, constricted above the middle with the
apex expanded and the margin frilled, (the outer portion
strongly recurved in living material), finely pubescent,
with three green stripes, center of the lip with an
4
elliptical thickened concavity which is rich cinnabar red,

especially if viewed from beneath; base with poorly-
defined tuberosities that clasp the green column;
FRUIT: an ellipsoid capsule 7 x 4 mm.
Additional specimens examined:

UNITED STATES: Arizona, Cochise County: At
base of rocks in moist soil, above Long Park, Chiricahua
Mountains. Elevation: 9,300 feet. (Bloomed in
cultivation at Tucson in February 1965). August 27,
1964, R. J. Barr 64-497 (ARIZ); On north slope east of
Barfoot Park, Chiricahua Mountains. Elevation: 9,200
feet. August 11, 1965, R. J. Barr 65-301A (ARIZ);
common on N slopes under Pseudotsuga above Rustler
Park, Chiricahua Mountains. Elevation: 9,200 feet.
August 9, 1965, R. J. Barr 65-293 (ARIZ); Chiricahua
Mountains under Douglas fir, pine, aspen, just below
Rustler Park; 6/4/1965, Walker s.n. (Southwest Research
Station); Coronado National Forest, Pinery Canyon Rd.
1.5 miles W of Onion Saddle, oak pine forest along
stream; 6/12/1987, L.R. Landrum 5504 with S.S.
Landrum (ASU); Coronado National Forest. Pinery
Canyon Road, 1.5 miles W of Onion Saddle, oak pine
forest along stream. Ca. 6000 ft. Flowers whitish with
orange-red structure. 12 June 1987, L. R. Landrum 5504
with S. S. Landrum (ARIZ); Locally common on shaded
slopes in mixed conifer woodland with Abies concolor,
Pseudotsuga, Quercus gambelli; Bear Canyon Trail; NE 1/4
Sec 29; T23S; R20E. Elevation 7320 feet. 9 June 1991, J.
E. Bowers 3527, S. P. McLaughlin (ARIZ); Perennial along
trail to Bond Spring; T23S; R20E; sec 34; with
5
Pseudotsuga menziesii, Abies concolor, Fraxinus velutina;

elevation ca 8300 feet. 12 July 1992, J. E. Bowers 3683,
S. P. McLaughlin (ARIZ). Graham County: Pseudotsuga-
Abies concolor-Pinus strobiformis forest, lower slope, SW-
16°; granite. Below road beyond Webb Peak turnoff,
Pinaleno Mountains, elevation: 9,400 feet. August 16,
1962, W. A. Niering, R. H. Whittaker, stand #409
(ARIZ); above road on "L" above Hospital Flats.
Pinaleno Mts, 9100'. 8/18/1958, W. A. Niering s.n.
(ARIZ); Post Creek, Pinaleno Mountains (Mt. Graham)
elevation: 9,000 feet. August 7, 1965, Walker s.n.
(ARIZ); Mt. Graham, moist wooded ravine along road
just east of turnoff for Hospital Flat Campground.
9050', 7/6/1980, C. J. Sheviak 2639 (NYS). Greenlee
County: Hannagan Meadows. July 15, 1964, Margaret
Schmidt 31; Det. by Carl Sager-1970. (ARIZ); Apache
National Forest, Rte. 666, Hannagan Campground,
Spruce zone, 9000', 7/24/1973, Lehto, McGill, Nash &
Pinkhava 11308 (ASU). Pima County: Catalina
Mountains, deep shade north slopes in Douglas fir belt,
8500 ft. July 13, 1944, Walter S. Phillips 2403 (ARIZ); In
deep shade in mixed conifer forest; along the North
Slope Trail, Rincon Mountains; elevation 8000 feet. 12
June 1982, J. E. Bowers R270, S. R. McLaughlin (ARIZ).
Santa Cruz County: Growing in rich leaf mold near
Douglas fir, north exposure just above bottom of
canyon, 100 yds up the trail above Florida Springs,
Santa Rita Mountains. May 31, 1980, Jack Kaiser s.n., det.
C.T. Mason (ARIZ); Santa Catalina Mountains, Marshall
Gulch, Arizona. June 1907, Thornber, McDougal and Lloyd
s.n. (ARIZ); Santa Catalina Mountains, Marshall Gulch,
6
16-20 June 1907, J. J. Thornber and Lloyd 4196 (AMES,

US);
NEW MEXICO, Grant County: Black Range at
Wrights Cabin Campground, 33 miles E of Silver City.
Ponderosa Pine, Douglas fir, Gambel's oak, common
on shaded areas on slopes in oak litter. Up to 10" tall,
scape and flowers pale pink. 6/6/1968, Hess 1975,
(NMSU); Black Range, Iron Creek Recreation Area. sec.
18, T16S, R9W 7200'; 6/9/1985, Worthington 13233
(UTEP). Lincoln County: Krane Canyon. West of
Alto, T10S R13E sec 31 7800'; 7/11/1977, Reggie Fletcher
2273 (UNM); Lincoln National Forest, Three Rivers
west of Sierra Blance; see 36; T10S, R10E under oaks;
5/21/1984, Reggie Fletcher and S. Lucas 7618 (UNM);
Sacramento (White) Mts., along Eagle Creek at junction
Hwy 532 and Forest Road 127, T10S; R13E; sec 31
about 8000' elevation, N slope Douglas fir forest.
6/9/1982, Worthington 8514 (ASU); Lincoln National
Forest, jct. hwy 532 and FSR 127 at Eagle Creek; T10S,
R13E. sec. 31 8000'; 6/9/1982, Worthington 8514
(UTEP); White Mts., Eagle Creek Canyon, 0.4 miles
NW jct. hwy 532 with Forest Rd. 127 July 1, 1984,
Worthington 12201 (SEL); Otero County: Otero
County, NE slope at head of Sixteen Springs Canyon,
Sacramento Mtns. Todson s.n. (US); Rudiso Creek, 7500' ;
6/11/1936 Roberson and Humphrey s.n. (UNM). TEXAS,
Culberson County: Guadalupe Mts., Bowl, canyon just
N of Juniper trail; conifer woodland; collected by Brent
Wauer. Fruit erect, brown. 22-24 Jun 1992, A. M. Powell
5866 (SRSC); Exterior lip revolute, fringed-incised,
pubescent, 3-veined, pale-translucent, inside portion
rectangular and red-orange across, the 3 veins evident,
7
pubescent in back throat; sepals and petals pale, semi-

translucent. 13 Jun 1992, A. M. Powell 5856 (SRSC); Jeff
Davis County: Davis Mts., Mt Livermore, 100 yds
below Bridge Gap. Lip Whitish, Throat red-orange. 18
May 1992, Kelly Bryan s.n. (SRSC); upper Limpia Canyon,
Davis Mountains, moist shaded ground along creek,
2200 m, 11 June 1926, E. J. Palmer 30786 (AMES).
The following specimens were examined and/or

cited by Szlachetko and have incomplete data and were
unavailable for re-examination by either Coleman or
Brown. In addition there is some confusion as to the
location of the Todson specimens. Szlachetko cites
them from NMSU, which is Northwest Missouri State
University, but in all likelihood they were from New
Mexico State University, which is NMS. Due to long-
term storage at NMSU and loans at NMC specimens
could not be verified.
ARIZONA: Cochise County, along Onion Saddle -

Rustler Park Road, E slope just below ridge of
Chiricahua Mts. Todson s.n. (US).
NEW MEXICO: Grant County: North slope of
Signal Peak, Pinos Altos Mts. 2 mi S of Redstone Cabin,
Todson s.n. (NMSU); Wright Cabin Canyon, Black
Range, on E facing slope Todson s.n. (NMSU); item, but
....33 mi E of Silver City on St Hwy 90, Hess 1975
(NMSU). Sierra County: North facing slope, small
canyon .5 mile S of Emory Pass, Black Range Todson s.n.
(NMSU); Mogollon Mts., Bearwallow Mt. E aspect of
upper slope, Moir & Fitzhugh 541 (NMSU)
8
HABITAT: dry coniferous forests, hillsides and creek

canyons from 6000' - 9400' elevation.
RANGE: southwestern Arizona (Cochise, Graham,

Greenlee, and Pima Counties); southern New Mexico
(Grant, Lincoln, Otero, and Sierra Counties); western
Texas (Culberson and Jeff Davis Counties).
FLOWERING PERIOD: early May - early June
ETYMOLOGY: arizonica after the State of Arizona

where the first collection was made within the known
range of the species.
Schiedeella arizonica P.M. Brown has been known,

under various names, in the southwestern United States
since Thornber's 1906 collection from Arizona.
Thornber simply labels the collection Spirostachys a genus
that appears to be unpublished. In 1938 Charles
Schweinfurth annotated the specimens as Spiranthes
parasitica A. Rich. & Gal. Both Correll (1950) and Luer
(1975) cite this first collection in the United States and
continued to use the generic name Spiranthes. Thornber
collected the species again from the same area in 1907
and it was not until 1926 that Palmer collected it in
Texas and eventually Roberson and Humphrey
collected it in New Mexico in 1936. After that very few
collections were made for nearly 50 years until more
active fieldwork and orchid interest prevailed.
In 1920 Schlechter segregated several species

formerly in the genus Spiranthes into the genus
9
10
Fig. 1 continued
11
Schiedeella, found primarily in southern Mexico, Central

America and the Caribbean. It was not until Garay
(1980) published his exhaustive work on the
Spiranthinae that Schlechter's name slowly came into
general usage. Both Correll (1950) and Luer (1976)
used the genus Spiranthes for all of the spiranthoid
segregates. Catling (1989) published one of the earliest
recent taxonomic listings that utilized Garay's treatment
of the subtribe. Two of the distinguishing features of
the genus Schiedeella are the linear to ovate, long-petioled
leaves that are ususally absent at anthesis and that many
of the species in the genus have distinctively colored
nectary patches on the lip.
In 1978 Donald Dod described a new species,

Spiranthes fauci-sanguinea Dod, from the Dominican
Republic. One of the most striking aspects of the
flowers was the cinnabar-red patch on the lip. During
the course of her study of the Spiranthinae, Pamela
Burns-Balogh (1989) transferred Spiranthes fauci-sanguinea
to the genus Schiedeella, stating that the specimens from
the southwestern United States (Arizona, New Mexico
& Texas) were also this species. Dariusz Szlachetko
(1991, 1992) included in his treatments of Schiedeella the
range of S. fauci-sanguinea as the Dominican Republic
and southwestern United States through Mexico to
Central America. His work with the type and original
description of S. parasitica led to his determination that
the plants previously addressed as S. parasitica from the
southern portion of the range were not that species and
that S. parasitica should be reduced to a variety of
Schiedeella llaveana and that the range was restricted to
12
southern Mexico and Central America: Schiedeella violacea

var. parasitica (A. Rich. & Gal.) Szlachetko. In 1996
Brown published a synopsis of this taxonomic history
and, following both Burns-Balogh and Szlachetko noted
the change in the name of the southwestern United
States plants. This quickly elucidated comments from
Tom Todson and Ed Greenwood to Brown and
Coleman (personal communications) that they seriously
doubted that the Dominican taxon was the same as the
southwestern US taxon, especially considering the range
of the taxa under consideration. Although Coleman
and Brown both expressed interest in trying to pursue
this question it was not taken up again until 1999. By
then Coleman had completed exhaustive herbaria
examinations of numerous specimens from the
southwestern United States and both he and Brown had
compared them with an isotype of S. fauci-sanguinea (US,
AMES) and were satisfied that two distinctive taxa were
involved. Discussions with Dod (Brown) were very
helpful as Dod indicated that he also was not satisfied
with Burns-Balogh's statement that the southwestern
US plants were the same taxon as the Dominican plants.
Accepting Szlachetko's research that Schiedeella

llaveana var. parasitica (syn. S. parasitica s.s.) is a totally
different plant from the red spotted taxa, careful
comparison of S. fauci-sanguinea with the southwestern
US taxon resulted in the need to describe S. arizonica.
Differences are numerous, and most notably in the
shape of the lip and overall size of the perianth, habit of
the inflorescence, and shape of the leaves (Fig. 1). Dod
also, in his original description, states that S. fauci-
13
sanguinea grows from 2-4 cm tall - and plants of S.

arizonica that have been examined vary from 5 - 25 cm
tall (although Luer states the height to 30 cm).
Although all of the current and historical sites for S.
arizonica in the United States are near the Mexican
border, inquiries and examinations of specimens from
many herbaria have not resulted in any northern
Mexican specimens. Despite Szlachetko's statement
(1992) that the range of S. fauci-sanguinea is from
southwestern US throughout Mexico to Central
America, he does not cite any specimens from the
bordering states of Sonora or Chihuahua, although he
gives Chihuahua as a state in the range of S. fauci-
sanguinea. Such herbaria as the University of Arizona
(ARIZ) have extensive collections from northern
Mexico, nevertheless much of the Mexican areas are
inaccessible and the species most certainly is easily
overlooked, especially if the collector is not orchid-
oriented and searching for it.
Acknowledgements:
The authors thank Chuck Sheviak, Paul M. Catling,
Donald Dod, Tom Todson, and Ed Greenwood as well
as the curators and collection managers of the following
herbaria for their assistance: US, AMES, NY, ARIZ,
UTEP, NMC, ASU, SEL, SRSU, & NMSU.
Paul Martin Brown, Research Associate, University of Florida

Herbarium, Florida Museum of Natural History,
Gainesville, FL. PMB is the editor of the Journal and
currently coordinates the Florida Native Orchid Project.
14
Working with Stan Folsom they are completing work on a

new Field Guide to the Wild Orchids of Florida.
Ronald A. Coleman, 11520 E. Calle del Valle, Tucson AZ 85749

Ron is the author of Wild Orchids of California, and numerous
articles on the native orchids of California and Arizona/New
Mexico. He will be a speaker at the 5th Annual North American
Native Orchid Conference in July 2000.
Literature Cited:
Brown, P.M.1996. Schiedeella fauci-sanguinea: a new name for an old
plant. NANOJ 2(1): 66-68.
Burns-Balogh, P. 1982. Generic redefinition in the subtribe
Spiranthinae (Orchidaceae) Amer. J. of Bot. 69:1119-1132.
1986. A Synopsis of Mexican Spiranthineae. Orquidea
(Mex.) 10(1): 76-96.
1989. Schiedeella dodii Burns-Balogh, a new species from
the Dominican Republic. Die Orchidee 40(5): 169-173.
Catling, Paul M. 1989. Biology of North American
Representatives of the subfamily Spiranthoideae in North
American Native Terrestrial Orchid Propagation Conference
Proceedings, Brandywine Conservancy pp. 49-67.
Coleman, R. A. 1996. Orchids of Arizona, a preliminary checklist.
NANOJ 2(2): 121-129.
Correll, D. S. 1950. Native Orchids of North America, north of Mexico.
Chronica Botanica, Waltham.
Dod, D. 1978. Orquideas Dominicanas Nuevas III. Moscosoa 1(3):
60-62.
Garay, L. A., 1980. A Generic Revision of the Spiranthinae. Bot.
Mus. Leaf. Harv. Univ. 28(4): 278-425.
Liggio, J. & Ann Orto Liggio. 1999. Wild Orchids of Texas.
University of Texas Press, 227 pp.
Luer, C. A. 1975. Native Orchids of the United States and Canada,
excluding Florida. NY Botanical Garden, Bronx. 360 pp.
Schlechter, R. 1920. Versuch einer Neuordnung der Spiranthinae.
Beih. Bot. Centralbl. 37(2): 317-454.
15
Szlachetko, D. L. 1991. Notes on the genera Schiedeella and

Funkiella (Orchidaceae, Spiranthinae) Fragm. Flor. Geobot.
36(1): 13-21.
1992. A revision of Schiedeella. Fragm. Flor. Geobot. 37(1):
157-204.
Fig. 2
Arizona red-spot ladies-tresses
Schiedeella arizonica
16
left:
tuberous rootstock
with (1) leaf petiole
and (2) developing
flower stem
below:
rosette of leaves; the
petiole are not
evident in the leaf
litter
Photos by Ronald A.
Coleman
17
Empiricist : IN ANTICIPATION OF THE GROWING SEASON
A typical herbarium label showing a variety of

information.
18
IN ANTICIPATION OF THE GROWING

SEASON
The Slow Empiricist
The growing season for most of temperate North

America is beginning and the amateur botanist is eagerly
looking to the time when he or she can begin to explore
for their favorite species, the orchids that they admire
so much and hope to find in the ensuing months. The
non-growing season should not have been spent in idle
pursuits for this is the time that the amateur should be
taking stock of his or her limitations and becoming
more experienced in the study of and knowledge about
orchids.
One of the ways that a person can find out about

orchids is to travel to the closest herbarium and make
use of the information that these places contain. Many
universities have excellent resources in their herbaria
and are usually very happy to accommodate anyone
who has a serious interest in plants. At the end of this
article I have listed the names and places where you can
go to make use of the information that herbaria provide.
For the most inexperienced of us, an herbarium is

an archival place that stores information in the form of
19
specimens and accompanying data about the specimens,

much like a library stocks books for reference. Often
the specimen is preserved under a clear plastic sheet,
which shows you somewhat how the plant looked in its
mature form. I say somewhat because to the beginner
seeing such a sheet; it might look like a dried up, slightly
shriveled, desiccated piece of flora that has little
resemblance to the living plant. What it can do is
provide you with all idea of the relative size of the plant
and the general outline of the plant. You can see the
position of the leaves, if they are present, or, learn that
the leaves were absent at flowering. You will get an idea
of the floral parts and their relationship to each other
and the rest of the plant structure. Usually, the roots
are present as well and can give you further information
about the plant.
There should be a label affixed to the sheet with

information about where the specimen was collected,
when it was collected and possibly other pertinent data.
Sometimes the collector will give very specific
information as to the location and just as often, only a
general idea as to the site locale. Dates of collection will
give you an approximate idea of when the plants bloom
in the particular area where they were collected. Each
year, it should be remembered, will not be exactly like
any other, so the information should be used
judiciously. The same holds true for the specific sites
mentioned. Many things happen over the years
between the time something has been collected and the
year that you go in search of the same site. Even if the
information has been very specific, the site may have
20
been drastically changed. Sites are cleared for

development; successional changes occur in sites that
are not disturbed and attacks from disease, animal
interference or acts of nature like fire or drought can
affect the location to the detriment of the plants you are
seeking.
I can give you a couple of actual examples that

muddied orchid hunting using herbarium information.
In one instance the state put in a new road with the
same route number as the old. It sometimes followed
the original route and at other times cut through new
territory. If one isn't aware that these changes occurred,
mileages could be thrown off, or old abandoned
sections totally missed.
The other example shows the craftiness of the

collector of the specimen as he/she describes the
location for the vouchers. I was told by Paul Martin
Brown that he had to collect directions from 12
different herbaria because the lady who described the
location of the plants gave only a portion of the
directions to each institution. Her intent was to protect
the location from the casual enthusiast and to make it as
difficult as possible to discover her site, thereby, to her
mind I'm surmising, protecting the specimens from
harm.
The people who work in the herbarium are an

excellent source to find and use the information that
you are seeking. If you can be persistent in requesting
more information from them you may find out current
21
status or additional data that has not yet been logged

into the collections, or, if you are lucky you can pick up
that the route was straightened several years ago,
throwing the distances off and not fail in your quest.
They can point you to other references in journals,
periodicals and related literature that will help fill out
the picture of the species you are seeking. I would also
suggest that when you begin to look at herbarium sheets
that you take notes of what you have discovered and
that you carry a hand lens to more closely examine the
specimens. When you are looking at them up close you
may get a better understanding of the structure and how
it might differ from a related species. The genus
Spiranthes comes to mind as being closely alike but
having subtle differences. Here herbarium sheets can
reveal the differences and should be immensely helpful
in distinguishing species that bloom at different times
and locales that can't be compared side-by-side in the
field. Two specimens from the collection can be put
out for side-by-side comparison and easy examination.
I hope you will try to make use of the valuable

information that is available to you at these institutions
so that you will be better prepared to conduct your
forays into nature. You may even get to the point of
helping the herbaria grow by contributing information
to them from your own expeditious discoveries.
Nearly all colleges and universities with biology

or botany departments, regardless of size, as well as
many natural history museums and botanical gardens,
have an herbarium. Before visiting it is always prudent
22
to make an appointment so a member of the herbarium

staff can assist you. In smaller institutions there may
not be a full time staff person. Each herbarium has its
own set of guidelines for examining and handling
specimens, and often you will be asked to read these
through and sign indicating that you fully understand
their rules and agree to abide by them. To find a
herbarium in your area you need to consult the Index
Herbariorum, a publication that lists all the herbaria in the
world, what their specialties are and the proper persons
to contact to make arrangements for a visit. Although
this reference work is usually only found at herbaria it
can also be accessed on the Internet at
http://www.nybg.org/bsci/ih/ih.html.
If you do not have Internet access, any herbarium

can advise you of other herbaria. Some major herbaria
in different parts of North America are:
CANADA
McGill Herbarium
Macdonald Campus of McGill University
21111 Lakeshore Rd.
Ste.-Anne-de-Bellevue, Québec, H9X-3V9
Phone: 398-7864
Fax: 398-7897
US
Harvard University Herbaria,
22 Divinity Avenue,
Cambridge Massachusetts 02138,
Emily W. Wood
Manager Of The Systematics Collections
23
Email: ewood@oeb.harvard.edu
Phone: (617) 495-1495 Fax: (617) 495-9484
The Marion Ownbey Herbarium

Department of Botany
Washington State University
Pullman, WA 99164-4238
Phone: 509-335-3250
FAX: 509-335-3517
E-mail: wsherb@mail.wsu.edu
Larry Hufford, Director
E-mail: hufford@mail.wsu.edu
University of Florida Herbarium (FLAS)

Florida Museum of Natural History
379 Dickinson Hall
PO Box 110575
Gainesville, FL 32611-0575 USA
Telephone: (352) 392-1767
Fax: (352) 846-2016
Dr. Norris H. Williams, Curator
Kent D. Perkins Collection Manager
E-mail: herb@flmnh.ufl.edu
Herbarium
Missouri Botanical Garden
P.O. Box 299
Saint Louis, Missouri 63166-0299
Location: 4344 Shaw Boulevard.
Phone: 314/577-5196
Fax: 314/ 577-9596.
http://www.mobot.org
24
Jepson Herbarium
University of California
1001 Valley Life Sciences Building #2465
Berkeley, California 94720-2465
U.S.A.
Phone: 510/ 643-7008.
Fax: 510/ 643-5390.
http://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/
Brent D. Mishler, herbaria@ucjeps.herb.berkeley.edu
MEXICO
Herbario AMO
Apartado Postal 53-123
11320 Mexico City, Distrito Federal
Mexico
Location: Cerrada de Moctezuma 16, La Herradura, 53920
Huixquilucan, Estado de México, Mexico.
Eric Hagsater
Phone: [52] 5/ 294-2862.
Fax: [52] 5/ 531-4349
Email:eric@mail.internet.com.mx
The Slow Empiricist
25
Emanuel et al.: OCCURRENCE OF WILD COCO
Keenan: A SHORT HISTORY OF THE GENUS CYPRIPEDIUM
wild coco
Eulophia alta
26
Emanuel et al.: OCCURRENCE OF WILD COCO
OCCURRENCE OF WILD COCO,

EULOPHIA ALTA (L.) Fawcett & Rendle,
AT ROCK SPRINGS RUN STATE
RESERVE, ORANGE COUNTY,
FLORIDA
Brian Emanuel, Jo Anna Watson Baber & Mike Beckwith
Wild coco, Eulophia alta, has previously been

observed in Orange County, Florida (Keith Fischer pers.
comm., Walter Taylor pers. comm.) however, it has
never been documented through a voucher specimen.
In May of 1999 author Mike Beckwith observed a small
colony of this terrestrial orchid on the STS mitigation
site of Rock Springs Run State Reserve. Subsequent
searching by the authors revealed three additional
populations of wild coco on the property. The
populations range in size from 4 to 20 plants. The
plants were observed flowering from September
through November 1999.
Rock Springs Run State Reserve is located south

of State Road 46 twelve miles west of US Interstate 4 in
Orange and Lake Counties, Florida. All four
populations are in Orange County, less than .5 km of
the Lake County line to the north. It seems probable,
27
Keenan: AEmanuel
SHORT HISTORY
et al.: OF THEOF
OCCURRENCE WILD CYPRIPEDIUM
GENUS COCO
with further surveying that this species will be found

within Lake County.
The populations of wild coco are found in wet

pastures that border forested wetlands. They are
growing in association with bahia grass (Paspalum
notatum), dog fennel (Eupatorium capillifolium), day flower
(Commelina erecta), ceasar weed (Urena lobata), green briar
(Smilax sp.), trumpet vine (Campsis radicans), climbing
hempweed (Mikania scandens), salt bush (Baccharis
halimifolia), coinwort (Centella erecta), passion flower,
(Passiflora incarnata), live oak (Quercus virginiana), and
laurel oak (Quercus hemisphaerica).
Soil samples were collected at three of the wild

coco populations. The soil type of all three samples is
Immokalee fine sand. It is nearly level, poorly drained
and exhibits a low organic matter content of 1-2%. The
pH of the soil ranges from 5.7 – 5.8.
A voucher specimen has been sent to the
University of South Florida Herbarium in Tampa.
Brian Emanuel
Wekiva Basin GeoPark
1800 Wekiwa Circle
Apopka, Florida 32712
Jo Anna Watson Baber

Mike Beckwith
St. Johns River Water Management District
31600 CR – 433
Sorrento, Florida 32776
28
A SHORT HISTORY OF THE GENUS

CYPRIPEDIUM
Phillip E. Keenan
It is no secret that Cyps (insider jargon) are my

favorite native orchids. Nothing unusual there. I am
sure many of you have the same preference. There are
12 species in North America and about 33 species in
eastern Asia (a flexible figure that depends on the latest
authority), with the most diversity in China where some
30 species have been discovered. North America is
second. The great Linnaeus, the Swede, first offered the
genus name Cypripedium (from the island of Cyprus,
birthplace of Venus, and the Greek word meaning
slipper) in his Genera Plantarum in 1737, and later in his
Species Plantarum in 1753. All the slipper orchids were
included in the one genus of Cypripedium until Pfitzer, in
1888, split the tropical species into three separate
genera:
1. the so-called conduplicate-leaved
Paphiopedilum (approximately 60 species)
of southeast Asia,
2. the South American Phragmipedium
(approximately 20 species), and
3. a much smaller South American genus,
the Selenepedium (3 or 4 species), and
43
counting Cypripedium for a total of four

genera.
4. Recently, a fifth genus was added:
Mexipedium, based on a single species
from southern Mexico. (NANOJ 3(3):
341.)
The taxonomy and classification of Cypripedium,
therefore, "officially" dates back to 1888, even though
many of the species were first discovered long before
then. In fact, according to Merle Reinikka in his A
History of the Orchid (1972), page 10, "the occurrence of
a native North American orchid in Europe" predates
the introduction of tropical species by sixty years.
Examples include Cypripedium acaule, the pink

lady's-slipper, first described by the Englishman,
William Aiton in 1789, based on a plant that first
flowered in Kew, England at the famous Royal Botanic
Gardens, from an introduction three years earlier by a
Sir William Hamilton (I could find no actual location
and date in North America). Historically, the first
mention of the pink lady's-slipper dates back to 1700,
when plants were given multiple names in a period long
before the binomial system of naming plants was
established by Linnaeus. The earliest New England
colonial settlements date back to the early 1600's, so it
took awhile for the settlers to take much scientific
notice of the flora, preoccupied as they were with
simply surviving in their new land. It is interesting to
note that the earliest colored painting of any North
American slipper orchid is that of Cypripedium acaule by
one of America's earliest botanists, Mark Catesby in
44
1754, in his The Natural History of Carolina, Florida and the

Bahama Islands. One hundred years later, on June 5,
1856, to be exact, Henry David Thoreau, in one of only
two or three references to the pink lady's-slipper in
his Journals, waxed enthusiastically: " Everywhere now in
dry pitch pine woods stand the red lady's-slippers over
the red pine leaves on the forest floor, rejoicing in
June." The first black and white drawing of C. acaule,
however, is that of Leonard Plukenet in 1700 when he
gave it the long, unwieldy, descriptive pre-Linnean name
of "Helleborine Calceolus dicta, Mariana, folis, binis e radice ex
adverso prodeuntibus." Quite a mouthful. We have Carolus
Linnaeus to thank for bringing uniformity into the
world of taxonomy (naming of plants and animals) with
binomial nomenclature.
Another early discovery involved the queen

lady's-slipper, Cypripedium reginae, the second North
American slipper orchid to be named, which was
"officially" described as C. reginae in 1788, by a Thomas
Walter, an American, in Flora Caroliniana (actual location
not known), the same year he died, at the age of 48. The
queen lady's-slipper was first known well before 1731
when a Philip Miller grew it in Chelsea, England.
Apparently no one bothered to describe it then, at least
according to the "new" rules of nomenclature. Many of
North America's beautiful lady's-slippers - as well as
other orchids from all over the world - were first
imported and grown in England, especially dating from
the establishment of The Horticultural Society of
London in 1809. The English have always loved their
orchids and could afford to send out most of the early
45
explorers who scoured the world and shipped hundreds

of thousands of plants back to their employers in
England, most of which died in transit or later on in
suffocating hot houses before the key to successful
indoor growing was mastered.
These earliest discoveries can be contrasted with

some of the latest on the west coast, following the
Lewis and Clark Expedition funded by President
Thomas Jefferson in the early 1800s. Cypripedium
fasciculatum, the fascinating little brownie lady's-
slipper, was neither discovered nor described until 1882
by Sereno Watson (NANOJ 1(1):59) of the United
States who based it on a collection made in northern
California (Plumas County near Prattville, May 1881))
and Washington state (White Salmon River, May 1880)
by gentlemen named Austin, Bradley and Suksdorf. It
would be highly interesting to read the stories of these
early explorations and discoveries, but apparently most
of these intrepid men failed to keep detailed accounts of
their travels. Too bad.
A co-endemic of Cypripedium fasciculatum, with

perhaps the most restricted range of any North
American lady's-slipper, is the charming California
lady's-slipper slipper orchid, C. californicum, of the
northern Sierras in California and the Siskyous in
extreme southwestern Oregon. It too is one of the last
lady's-slippers to be discovered on the North American
continent. Asa Gray first described it in 1868 in the
Proceedings of the American Academy 7:389, from the Red
Mountains in Plumas County, California, with no date.
46
The third member of the three northwestern

endemics is Cypripedium montanum, the mountain
lady's-slipper, first collected (in Washington State) and
described by the famous English explorer, David
Douglas, in 1840. Again, the actual "official"
description was made by the famous English
orchidologist, John Lindley in 1840 in his Genera and
Species of Orchids p. 528, six years after Douglas' untimely
and freakish death at the age of 35. He died after a fall
in an animal trap and subsequent goring by a bull that
occurred in Hawaii in 1834, after several narrow escapes
in the Pacific Northwest. Douglas is also noted for
having more plants named in his honor than any other
botanist in history, the Douglas fir, of course, one of the
best known. It was not discovered by Douglas, however
(Archibald Menzies, a Scotsman gets the credit). Quite
a record for one who died so young.
The Kentucky lady's-slipper, Cypripedium

kentuckiense, is an example of a slipper assumed to be a
variation of another, in this case the yellow lady's-
slipper, C. parviflorum var. parviflorum (or var. pubescens).
Finally, it was described as a distinctive species in 1981
by Clyde Reed and generally supported as a valid species
since then (NANOJ 1(3):255).
The ram's-head lady's-slipper, Cypripedium

arietinum, was another introduction via English
botanists: Robert Brown first describing it in 1813 based
on a flower that bloomed in Kew from a North
American collection in 1808 by Chandler and
47
Buckingham. It is arguably the most distinctive

American slipper orchid because of its conical pouch or
lip petal. It is also closely related to the Chinese species
C. plectrochilum, (apparently no common name) which
also has a conical shape of the lip. The latter was
discovered by an Abbe Delavay in southwest Sichuan
and described by the Frenchman, M.A. Franchet in
1885, more than 75 years after our C. arietinum. Franchet
thought at the time of his discovery that it might
actually be the same species as ours. Apparently difficult
to distinguish as herbarium specimens, they are easily
distinguished in the field: rams-head is white with
heavy purple veining below the opening (mouth) in the
pouch, while plectrochilum is almost entirely white with
sometimes only a light pink wash and a pure white
staminode. Also, the shape of the lip is actually quite
different from our C. arietinum. Incidentally, Asa Gray
(1810-1888), the famous Harvard botanist, was one of
the earliest to point out the similarity between many
plants of eastern North America and eastern Asia.
(NANOJ 4(1):31).
We owe a debt of gratitude to French

missionaries for first astonishing the rest of the world
by the richness of the Chinese species of Cypripedium
after 1894, many years after the last of our three Pacific
Northwest endemics were discovered. The famous
American plantsman, E.H. Wilson, of the Arnold
Arboretum of Harvard University in Jamaica Plain
(Boston), Massachusetts, is believed to be the first to
send back living material (the others were herbarium
specimens) of Chinese cyps. Both the yellow Cypripedium
48
flavum and the wonderfully rich purple C. tibeticum were

successfully grown by 1911 in the Arnold Arboretum.
Continuing with the American members of the

genus, Cypripedium passerinum, has two common names,
sparrow's-egg lady's-slipper and Franklin's lady's-
slipper, the latter a reference to the famous Arctic
explorer who led an expedition within the Arctic where
the Englishman, Sir John Richardson, collected the first
plant in 1823. It is the most northern of our American
slipper orchids. Cypripedium candidum, the small white
lady's-slipper, was first described by the German, Karl
Ludwig Willdenow, in 1805, from a collection by the
American, Heinrich Muhlenberg in Pennsylvania.
Cypripedium guttatum, the spotted lady's-slipper,

was first described in 1800 by the Swede, Olof Swartz,
from an eastern Siberian plant first collected by J. G.
Gmelin. It could be the world champion slipper orchid
in terms of distribution, clear across Siberia and into
Alaska. The controversial Cypripedium yatabeanum, was
considered for many years by many authors a variety of
C. guttatum. It was first described as a separate species by
the Japanese, Tomitaro Makino, in 1899. Ernst Pfitzer
in 1903 retained its varietal status. Brown revalidated its
specific status in 1996 (NANOJ 1(3):239); and Phillip
Cribb, in 1997, retained its specific status in his great
book on The Genus Cypripedium, on the basis of its
yellow-green basic color which is marked with brown
rather than the white and purple colors in C. guttatum.
The two apparently hybridize on the Aleutians and
49
around Anchorage, Alaska, where Paul Martin Brown

formally recognized the natural hybrid as C. xalaskanum
in 1995 (NANOJ 1(3):239).
That brings us to the Cypripedium calceolus

complex, the yellow lady's-slipper of Europe, and, at
one time not too long ago, of North America, until J. T.
Atwood, in 1985, pronounced the American yellow-
lipped slippers distinct from the European yellow
calceolus, a belief quickly sanctioned by most orchid
experts in North America, as well as Phillip Cribb, the
English authority at Kew. This separation eventually
resulted in Sheviak's formation of the North American
taxa Cypripedium parviflorum var. parviflorum, C. parviflorum
var. pubescens, and C. parviflorum var. makasin, (NANOJ
2(4):319): one species with three varieties.
The lady's-slipper orchid, Cypripedium calceolus, of

Europe is probably the best known and most frequently
illustrated of all orchids throughout the world (Cribb
even adds "of all flowering plants"). It was first
illustrated in 1541 and first recognized as a European
native as early as 1568. It was also the first slipper
orchid recognized in Linnaeus' Genera Plantarum in 1737.
Finally, it is of the most widely distributed of all slipper
orchids, from England to Japan, via much of Europe
and a much narrower corridor through Siberia and
eastern Asia.
For a detailed explanation of the taxonomic

confusion - and resolution - in the yellow slipper
complex, one should consult two excellent authors: the
50
aforementioned The Genus Cypripedium by Phillip Cribb.

And Charles Sheviak who has written several articles in
the American Orchid Society Bulletin in 1994 and 1995
(NANOJ 2(4):319). The degree of resolution, however,
as they freely admit, is subject to change with further
notice.
In his classification, Cribb recognizes eleven

sections or subdivisions of the genus Cypripedium,
according to their anatomical, morphological and
molecular relationships, which help in showing which
species are more closely related to each other. In that
regard, C. acaule is in the monotypic section Acaulia,
having no close allies in the genus as evidenced by its
unique physical makeup. Another monotypic section is
section Enantiopedilum that finds the little brownie
lady's-slipper, C. fasciculatum alone. The beautiful and
unique slippers of C. californicum Cribb places in a
section Irapeana that also includes the Mexican species
C. irapeanum, C. molle, and C. dickinsonianum (NANOJ
2(1):3). The largest is section Cypripedium, and contains
the most species of all, including our C. parviflorum, C.
candidum, and C. montanum, all closely related. Cypripedium
reginae and C. passerinum are members of the section
Obtusipetala. The section Bifolia includes the two
closely related Alaskans, C. guttatum and C. yatabeanum.
The last section of North American representatives is
Trigonopedia which includes C. arietinum and the closely
related Asiatic, C. plectrochilum. The other four sections,
not mentioned here, include only Asiatic members of
the genus.
51
Philip E. Keenan, 31 Hillcrest Drive, Dover, NH 03820

Philip is the author of numerous articles on North American
native orchids and the recent book Wild Orchids Across North
America published by Timber Press.
Cypripedium acaule
pink lady's-slipper
52
Western Specialties:
Left: Cypripedium montanum,
mountain lady's-slipper;
top right: C. californicum
California lady's-slipper
slipper orchid; bottom right:
Cypripedium fasciculatum,
brownie lady's-slipper
53
The Yellow-flowered Slippers

top: left – large yellow lady’s-
slipper,
C. parviflorum var. pubescens
Right: Kentucky lady’s-slipper,
C. kentuckiense
Bottom: left – northern small
yellow lady's-slipper, C.
parviflorum var. makasin
right – southern small yellow
lady's-slipper, C. parviflorum var.
parviflorum
54
The Alaska Connection

Cypripedium guttatum, spotted
lady's-slipper;
Cypripedium yatabeanum,
Palomino lady’s-slipper,
55
queen lady's-slipper
Cypripedium reginae
56
FOR YOUR INFORMATION!

Two new species have recently been published
for North America. In the December issue of Lindleyana
Chuck Sheviak published an extensive article describing
Platanthera aquilonis. He gives exhaustive evidence as to
the separation of this species from Platanthera hyperborea
in North America. This also requires a new
combination for the previously published Platanthera
hyperborea forma alba.
Platanthera aquilonis Sheviak forma alba (Light)
P.M. Brown comb. nov.
Basionym: Platanthera hyperborea (Linnaeus) Lindley var.
hyperborea forma alba Light.
Light, M.S. & M. MacConaill. 1989. Lindleyana 4(3): 158-
160.
The following should be added to the Checklist:
Platanthera aquilonis Sheviak
SYN: Platanthera hyperborea (Linnaeus) Lindley in part
NORTHERN GREEN BOG ORCHIS
AK - NF s to CA, NM, IA e to MA
forma alba (Light) P.M. Brown - albino form
Brown, P.M. 2000. NANOJ 6(1): 43.
Light, M.S. & M. MacConaill. 1989. Lindleyana 4(3): 158-160.
Sheviak, C.J. 1999. Lindleyana 14(4): 193-203
In the December issue of Novon John

Freudenstein published Corallorhiza bentleyi, and entirely
new species from West Virginia. This is a most curious
and intriguing species that is restricted to a few square
meters of land.
The following should be added to the Checklist:
Corallorhiza bentleyi Freudenstein
BENTLEY'S CORALROOT
Freudenstein, J. 1999. Novon 9: 511-513.
57
Wagner, Wagner & Brown: RARE, THREATENED AND ENDANGED
ORCHIDS IN NORTH AMERICA
Part 1. Alabama - Kansas
RARE, THREATENED AND

ENDANGED ORCHIDS IN NORTH
AMERICA
Anne B. Wagner, Ken Wagner, Paul Martin Brown
In commencing to compile all of the information

needed to do this four-part article on the listed orchids
in North America, Anne & Ken Wagner were
approached and agreed to compile all of the data. IT
has been a massive work and they are to be
congratulated for persisting in contacting all of the
various agencies. In reading this information it is
essential to know that each state or province has its own
criteria and definitions of rare, threatened and
endangered. Unfortunately personal opinions and
priorities often color the makeup of these lists. We are
trying to give references wherever possible for the
plants that are listed. Some states update continually
other as far apart as 10 years! Very few states afford
legal protection to the plants. Websites are given and a
contact person when known. The nomenclature used is
as it was received from the various sources and often
does not agree with contemporary usage. In the
December Journal a complete list of cross-reference for
the names will be given as well as a summary by species.
44
If a given species is not listed for a given state or

province it means that the status has not been
determined - and that for any number of reasons.
When available, the status within the state or province is
given. Although abbreviations are not always consistent
the following usually are reliable: (may be preceded by a
S for state)
E = Endangered S1
T = Threatened S2
R=Rare S3
SC= Special Concern S3
X= extirpated
H = historical
For precise definitions and current status readers are
encouraged to contact the sources listed for each state
and province.
ALABAMA
Inventory List of Rare, Threatened and Endangered, Plants,
Animals and Natural Communities of Alabama dated June 1999
published by TNC, Alabama Natural Heritage Program.
http://www.heritage.tnc.org/nhp/us/al/
Aplectrum hyemale S2
Calopogon barbatus S1
Calopogon multiflorus S1
Corallorhiza wisteriana S2
Cypripedium candidum S1
Cypripedium kentuckiense S1
Epidendrum conopseum S2
Isotria verticillata S2
Liparis liliifolia S1
Liparis loeselii S1?
Listera australis S2
45
Platanthera blephariglottis var conspicua S1S2

Platanthera flava var flava S2S3
Platanthera integra S1S2
Platanthera integrilabia S2
Platanthera lacera S2
Platanthera nivea S2?
Platanthera peramoena S1
Ponthieva racemosa S2
Pteroglossaspis ecristata S1
Spiranthes longilabris S1
Spiranthes lucida S1
Spiranthes magnicamporum S3
ALASKA
No response
No Orchidaceae listed in the “Rare List.” Vascular Plant Tracking
List (listall.html) was updated in Feb 1998 and lists the following:
Feb 1998
http://www.uaa.alaska.edu/enri/aknhp_web/
http://www.uaa.alaska.edu/enri/aknhp_web/biodiversity/botani
cal/vascular_species_concern/species_table/botlist.html
Cypripedium montanum S1
Cypripedium parviflorum S2S3
Listera convallarioides S1
Malaxis paludosa S2S3
Piperia unalascensis S2
Platanthera chorisiana S3
Platanthera gracilis S2
Platanthera orbiculata S1
ARIZONA
Arizona Game and Fish Department
Heritage Data Management System
September 21, 1999
http://www.gf.state.az.us/
Calypso bulbosa SR
46
Coeloglossum viride var. virescens SR

Cypripedium parviflorum var. pubescens HS
Goodyera repens SR
Hexalectris revoluta HS
Hexalectris spicata SR
Hexalectris warnockii SR
Listera convallarioides SR
Malaxis corymbosa SR
Malaxis porphyrea SR
Malaxis tenuis SR
Platanthera hyperborea SR
Platanthera limosa SR
Platanthera purpurascens SR
Platanthera zothecina SR
Schiedeella parasitica SR
Spiranthes delitescens HS
Stenorrhynchos michuacanum SR
HS Highly Safeguarded: no collection allowed.
SR Salvage Restricted: collection only with permit.
ARKANSAS
ARKANSAS NATURAL HERITAGE COMMISSION
27 SEP 1999
Cindy Osborne, Data Manager
Arkansas Natural Heritage Commission
1500 Tower Building
323 Center Street
Little Rock, AR 72201
Phone: 501-324-9762, Fax: 501-324-9618
e-mail: cindy@dah.state.ar.us
http://www.heritage.state.ar.us:80/nhc/heritage.html
Calopogon oklahomensis S2
Calopogon tuberosus S2
Cypripedium kentuckiense S3
Cypripedium reginae S1
Habenaria repens S2
47
Hexalectris spicata S2
Liparis loeselii S1
Platanthera cristata S1S2
Platanthera flava S1S2
Platanthera nivea SH
Pogonia ophioglossoides S2
Spiranthes lucida S2
Spiranthes odorata S1
Spiranthes praecox S1S2
CALIFORNIA
California Native Plant Society's
Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California
Roxanne Bittman
Botanist, California Natural Diversity Database
Department of Fish and Game
(916)323-8970 (w)
rbittman@dfg.ca.gov
http://www.dfg.ca.gov/whdab/cnddb.htm
Corallorhiza trifida S2
Cypripedium californicum S4
Cypripedium fasciculatum S4
Cypripedium montanum S4
Listera cordata S4
Malaxis monophyllos ssp. brachypoda S2
Piperia candida S4
Piperia michaelii S4
Piperia yadonii S1
COLORADO
Contact: Jill Handwerk, Botany Information Manager, Colo NHP
jhand@lamar.colostate.edu
www.cnhp.colostate.edu
48
http://www.cnhp.colostate.edu/
http://ndis.nrel.colostate.edu/ndis/rareplants/cover.html
Cypripedium fasciculatum S3
Cypripedium pubescens S2
Epipactis gigantea S2
Listera borealis S2
Listera convallarioides S2
Malaxis brachypoda S1
Platanthera sparsiflora var. ensifolia S3
Platanthera zothecina S1
Spiranthes diluvialis S2
CONNECTICUT
Extracted from Connecticut's Plant list(plants.htm).
http://dep.state.ct.us/cgnhs/nddb/nddb2.htm
http://dep.state.ct.us/cgnhs/nddb/plants.htm
Aplectrum hyemale SC
Arethusa bulbosa E
Coeloglossum viride var. virescens SC
Corallorhiza trifida T
Cypripedium arietinum SC*
Cypripedium parviflorum SC*
Cypripedium reginae E
Goodyera repens var. ophioides SC*
Isotria medeoloides E
Liparis liliifolia E
Malaxis brachypoda E
Malaxis unifolia E
Platanthera blephariglottis E
Platanthera ciliaris T
Platanthera dilatata SC*
Platanthera flava SC
Platanthera hookeri SC*
Platanthera orbiculata SC*
Spiranthes tuberosa var. grayi SC*
Triphora trianthophora SC*
49
* Believed Extirpated
DELAWARE
September 23, 1999
Bill McAvoy
Botanist, Delaware Natural Heritage Program
302-653-2880
http://www.dnrec.state.de.us/fw/wildrehe.htm
Aplectrum hyemale S2
Arethusa bulbosa SH
Calopogon tuberosus var. tuberosus S1
Cleistes divaricata SX
Corallorhiza maculata var. maculata SH
Corallorhiza odontorhiza var. odontorhiza S1
Corallorhiza wisteriana SH
Cypripedium acaule S5
Cypripedium pubescens S1
Galearis spectabilis S3
Goodyera pubescens S4
Isotria medeoloides S1.1
Liparis liliifolia S2
Malaxis unifolia S1
Platanthera blephariglottis var. conspicua S1
Platanthera ciliaris SH
Platanthera clavellata S5
Platanthera cristata S2
Platanthera flava var. herbiola S1
Platanthera grandiflora SX
Platanthera lacera S3
Platanthera nivea SH
Platanthera peramoena S1.1
Platanthera psycodes SH
Pogonia ophioglossoides S2
Spiranthes cernua S4
50
Spiranthes lacera var. gracilis S2

Spiranthes lucida SH
Spiranthes odorata SU
Spiranthes praecox SH
Spiranthes tuberosa S1.1
Spiranthes vernalis S2
Tipularia discolor S5
Triphora trianthophora S1.1
FLORIDA
Florida Department of Plant Industry
Nancy C. Coile
endangered:
Basiphyllaea corallicola
Brassia caudata
Bulbophyllum pachyrhachis
Calopogon multiflorus
Campylocentrum pachyrrhizum
Corallorhiza odontorhiza
Cranichis muscosa
Cyrtopodium punctatum
Eltroplectris calcarata
Encyclia boothiana
Encyclia cochleata
Encyclia pygmaea
Epidendrum acunae
Epidendrum anceps
Epidendrum difforme
Epidendrum nocturnum
Epidendrum rigidum
Epidendrum strobiliferum
Galeandra beyrichii
Goodyera pubescens
Govenia utriculata
Habenaria distans
Hexalectris spicata
51
Ionopsis utricularioides
Isotria verticillata
Leochilus labiatus
Lepanthopsis melanantha
Liparis nervosa
Macradenia lutescens
Malaxis unifolia
Maxillaria crassifolia
Maxillaria parviflora
Oncidium bahamense
Oncidium floridanum
Oncidium luridum.
Platanthera clavellata
Platanthera integra
Pleurothallis gelida
Polyradicion lindenii
Polystachya concreta
Ponthieva brittoniae
Prescottia oligantha
Spiranthes adnata
Spiranthes brevilabris
Spiranthes costaricensis
Spiranthes elata
Spiranthes ovalis
Spiranthes polyantha
Spiranthes torta
Triphora craigheadii
Triphora latifolia
Tropidia polystachya
Vanilla barbellata
Vanilla dilloniana
Vanilla mexicana
Vanilla phaeantha
Threatened:
Bletia purpurea
52
Cleistes divaricata
Harrisella filiformis
Listera australis
Platanthera blephariglottis
Platanthera ciliaris
Platanthera cristata
Platanthera flava
Platanthera nivea
Pogonia ophioglossoides
Pteroglossaspis ecristata
Spiranthes laciniata
Spiranthes longilabris
Spiranthes tuberosa
Stenorrhynchos lanceolatus
Tipularia discolor
Triphora trianthophora;
2 commercially-exploited:
Encyclia tampensis
Epidendrum conopseum.
Florida Natural Areas Inventory

Extracted from “Florida Natural Areas Inventory, Tracked
Species - Plants and Lichens” (plants.htm) in FLA folder
http://www.fnai.org/index.htm
http://www.fnai.org/plants.htm#P
Basiphyllaea corallicola S1
Brassia caudata SX
Bulbophyllum pachyrachis S1
Campylocentrum pachyrrhizum S1
Corallorhiza odontorhiza S1
Cranichis muscosa SH
Eltroplectris calcarata S1
Epidendrum blancheanum S1
Epidendrum nocturnum S2
Epidendrum strobiliferum S1
53
Galeandra beyrichii S1
Goodyera pubescens S1
Govenia utriculata S1
Ionopsis utricularioides S1
Lepanthopsis melanantha S1
Macradenia lutescens SX
Malaxis unifolia S3
Maxillaria crassifolia S1
Oncidium bahamense S1
Oncidium floridanum S1
Oncidium undulatum S1
Platanthera clavellata S1
Platanthera integra S3S4
Pleurothallis gelida S2
Polyrrhiza lindenii S2
Ponthieva brittoniae S1
Prescottia oligantha S1
Spiranthes costaricensis S1
Spiranthes elata S1
Spiranthes lanceolata var. paludicolaS1
Spiranthes polyantha S1S2
Spiranthes torta S1
Triphora craigheadii S1
Triphora latifolia SH
Triphora yucatenensis S1
Tropidia polystachya SX
Vanilla barbellata S2
Vanilla mexicana S1
Vanilla phaeantha S2
GEORGIA
Greg Krakow, Data Manager
Georgia Natural Heritage Program
54
2117 U.S. Hwy. 278 S.E.

Social Circle, GA 30025
Voice: (770) 918-6411, (706) 557-3032; Fax: (706) 557-3033
EMail: greg_krakow@mail.dnr.state.ga.us
http://www.dnr.state.ga.us/dnr/wild/natural.html
http://www.dnr.state.ga.us/dnr/wild/sppl_t.htm
http://www.dnr.state.ga.us/dnr/wild/sppl_w.htm
Calopogon multiflorus SH
Cleistes bifaria S1
Corallorhiza maculata SH
Cypripedium acaule S4
Cypripedium calceolus var. parviflorum S2
Cypripedium calceolus var. pubescens S3
Epidendrum conopseum S3
Habenaria quinqueseta var. quinqueseta S1
Isotria medeoloides S2
Listera smallii S2
Malaxis spicata S1
Platanthera flava var. herbiola S1
Platanthera grandiflora S1
Platanthera integra S2
Platanthera integrilabia S1S2
Platanthera nivea S3
Platanthera psycodes S1?
Ponthieva racemosa S2?
Spiranthes brevilabris var. floridana S1
Spiranthes longilabris S1
Spiranthes ovalis S3
HAWAII
Extracted from “plist.htm” in Hawaii folder.
55
http://www.heritage.tnc.org/nhp/us/hi/
Platanthera holochila s1.2
IDAHO
Idaho Native Plant Society (INPS)
http://www2.state.id.us/fishgame/cdchome.htm
Cypripedium fasciculatum = State Priority 2
Cypripedium parviflorum var. pubescens = State Priority 1
Eburophyton austinae = State Monitor
Platanthera obtusata = Review
Platanthera orbiculata = State Monitor
Spiranthes diluvialis = Global Priority 2
ILLINOIS
Illinois Endangered Species Protection Board, Lincoln Tower
Plaza, 524 South Second Street, Springfield, IL 62701-1787
Endangered
Calopogon tuberosus
Cypripedium acaule
Cypripedium calceolus var. parviflorum
Cypripedium reginae
Hexalectris spicata
Isotria medeoloides
Isotria verticillata
Platanthera ciliaris
Platanthera clavellata
Platanthera flava var. flava
Platanthera flava var. herbiola
Platanthera leucophaea
Pogonia ophioglossoides
Spiranthes lucida
Spiranthes romanzoffiana
Spiranthes vernalis
Threatened
Corallorhiza maculata
Cypripedium candidum
56
INDIANA
Michael Homoya, Botanist/Plant Ecologist
Indiana DNR Division of Nature Preserves
http://www.ai.org/dnr/naturepr/index.htm
http://www.ai.org/dnr/naturepr/endanger/plant.htm
Arethusa bulbosa SX
Coeloglossum viride ST
Corallorhiza trifida SX
Cypripedium calceolus var. parviflorum SR
Cypripedium candidum SR
Hexalectris spicata SR
Malaxis unifolia SE
Platanthera ciliaris SE
Platanthera dilatata SE
Platanthera flava var. flava SE
Platanthera hookeri SX
Platanthera hyperborea ST
Platanthera leucophaea SE
Platanthera orbiculata SX
Platanthera psycodes SR
Spiranthes lucida SR
Spiranthes magnicamporum SE
Spiranthes ochroleuca ST
Spiranthes romanzoffiana SE
Spiranthes vernalis SR
IOWA
Iowa Native Plant Society
c/o Ed Freese, President
120 Sixth Avenue S.W.
Waverly, IA 50677
http://www.heritage.tnc.org/nhp/us/ia/
ftp://ftp.heritage.tnc.org/pub/nhp/us/ia/species.html
Aplectrum hyemale- none
Calopogon tuberosus- S
57
Coeloglossum viride- none

Corallorhiza maculata- T
Corallorhiza odontorhiza- none
Cypripedium X andrewsii- none
Cypripedium calceolus var. parviflorum- none
Cypripedium calceolus var. pubescens- none
Cypripedium candidum- S
Cypripedium reginae- T
Galearis spectabilis- none
Goodyera pubescens- none
Liparis liliifolia- none
Liparis loeselii- none
Malaxis unifolia- S
Platanthera clavellata- S
Platanthera flava- E
Platanthera hookeri- T
Platanthera hyperborea- T
Platanthera lacera- S
Platanthera leucophaea- E
Platanthera praeclara- T
Platanthera psycodes- S
Spiranthes cernua- none
Spiranthes lacera- T
Spiranthes lucida- E
Spiranthes magnicamporum- S
Spiranthes ovalis- T
Spiranthes romanzoffiana- T
Spiranthes vernalis- T
Triphora trianthophora- none
KANSAS
The Kansas Natural Heritage Inventory (KSNHI)
http://www.heritage.tnc.org/nhp/us/ks/
ftp://ftp.heritage.tnc.org/pub/nhp/us/ks/plants.html
Calopogon oklahomensis D.H. Goldman S1
Hexalectris spicata (Walter) Barnhart S1
58
Liparis loeselii (L.) Rich. SH

Malaxis unifolia Michx. S1
Platanthera lacera (Michx.) G. Don var. lacera S2
Platanthera praeclara Sheviak & Bowles S1
Spiranthes lucida (H.H. Eaton) Ames SH
Spiranthes ovalis Lindl. S1
Triphora trianthophora (Sw.) Rydb. subsp. trianthophora S1
Platanthera orbiculata var. macrophylla ST
Spiranthes tuberosa var. grayi SC*
59
5th ANNUAL NORTH AMERICAN NATIVE

ORCHID CONFERENCE
Olympic National Park
Port Angeles, Washington
July 16-20, 2000
Speakers will include:
Larry Zettler, Scott Stewart, Chuck Sheviak, Carol Ferguson &
Kathleen Donham; Cliff Pelchat; Penny Latham; Paul Martin
Brown, Ron Coleman, Lorne Heshka and special speaker Joe
Liggio author of Wild Orchids of Texas who will speak on the
genus Hexalectris, as well as a very special presentation form
Europe on the bee orchids.
Field Trip highlights will include:

Piperia candida
Piperia elegans
Piperia transversa
Piperia unalascensis
Epipactis gigantea
Cephalanthera austiniae
Listera caurina
Corallorhiza mertensiana
Platanthera hyperborea complex
Platanthera dilatata complex
140
And a special trip on the 20th to Lake Elizabeth east of Seattle

for
Platanthera chorisiana
And many, many spectacular wildflowers!

Registration fee of $55 per person includes all field trips and
conference sessions.
Registrations should be sent to:
North American Native Orchid Alliance
PO Box 759
Acton, ME 04001-0759
207/636-2889
Because the date is nearing and the editor will be leaving July 1 for the
conference if you wish to attend please call for space. After July 1 you may
call Nancy Webb at 617/254-4815 for current information.
141
Brown: RECENT TAXONOMIC AND DISTRIBUTIONAL NOTES
FROM FLORIDA 1.
RECENT TAXONOMIC AND

DISTRIBUTIONAL NOTES FROM
FLORIDA 5.
Paul Martin Brown
Continuing with the publication of new taxa

from Florida, and often applicable to elsewhere in the
country, the following are proposed:
Corallorhiza wisteriana Conrad forma rubra P.M.

Brown forma nova
Forma plantae rubra conspeciebus diversa;. TYPE:
UNITED STATES: Florida, Marion County. Holotype:
Southwest 110th Street. January 24, 2000, Brown 20124
(holotype, FLAS) Photo. NANOJ 2000 6(1): 73.
Differing from typical Corallorhiza wisteriana by having its

stems red rather than flesh/brown in color; flowers red
with a white lip with red spotting.
ETYMOLOGY: rubra meaning red for the coloring of
the plant
Epidendrum amphistomum A. Richard forma

rubrifolium P.M. Brown forma nova
Forma folius rubrus conspeciebus diversa;. TYPE:
UNITED STATES: Florida, Collier County. Holotype:
Fakahatchee Swamp. January 30, 2000. Brown 20130
62
FROM FLORIDA 1.
(holotype, FLAS). Photo. Luer. 1972. Native Orchids of

Florida plate 63:1.
Differing from typical Epidendrum amphistomum by

having its stem and leaves a rich cranberry red in color.
The flowers are somewhat deeper bronze rather than
typical green. Plants occur scattered throughout the
Fakahatchee Swamp often accompanied by the typical
green foliage type. This does not appear to be a
function of increased light as the two colors often grow
side by side.
ETYMOLOGY: rubrifolium for the coloring of the
leaves
Listera australis Lindley forma scottii P.M. Brown

forma nova
Forma multiple leave within the inflorescence
conspeciebus diversa;. TYPE: UNITED STATES:
Florida, Alachua County. Holotype: off Williston Road
c. 3 miles west of I-75. January 23, 2000. Brown 20123
(holotype, FLAS). Photo. NANOJ 2000 6(1): 74.
ETYMOLOGY: scottii - named for Ken & Betty Scott

on whose property the plants were first noted.
Listera australis Lindley forma viridis P.M. Brown

forma nova
Forma cum florae viride conspeciebus diversa;. TYPE:

UNITED STATES: Florida, Alachua County.
Holotype: off Williston Road c. 3 miles west of I-75.
January 23, 2000. Brown 20122 (holotype, FLAS).
63
FROM FLORIDA 1.
Photo. NANOJ 2000 6(1): 74. Luer, 1972. Native Orchids

of FL. plate 17:6.
Flowers and entire plant green rather than with red
flowers or rust color on the leaves or stems.
ETYMOLOGY: viridis for the green coloration of the

flowers and the plant
Pteroglossaspis ecristata (Fernald) Rolfe forma

flava P.M. Brown forma nova
Forma cum florae flava conspeciebus diversa;. TYPE:
UNITED STATES: Florida, Hillsboro County.
Holotype: 12 September 1965. Beckner #728, with Jim &
Rita Lassiter. (holotype, FLAS 92514). Photo. NANOJ
2000 6(1): 73.
First found and photographed by Jim & Rita

Lassiter in 1965 the site originally had "hundreds of this
yellow-flowered variety in flatwoods off Waters Ave,
n.w. of Tampa" and has now been destroyed. There is a
current, unverified report for Clay County of this form.
I thank the Lassiters for the use of their slide for the
color illustration on page 73.
ETYMOLOGY: flava for the yellow coloration of the

flowers and the plant
Spiranthes xfolsomii P.M. Brown nothospecies nova

TYPE: UNITED STATES: Florida, Levy County. Pine
barren ponds. A. P. Garber Oct. 1877 s.n. (holotype,
FLAS 69863). Photo. NANOJ 2000 6(1) 74.
64
FROM FLORIDA 1.
Planta inter Spiranthes longilabris Lindley et Spiranthes

odorata (Nuttall) Lindley intermedia et habitu, colore et
forma florum, vel proprietibus speciearum mixtis
Intermediate in characters between the two parents

Spiranthes longilabris and S. odorata.
ETYMOLOGY: folsomii after Stan Folsom (1933 - )

who pointed out the potential hybrid in the field.
When we first arrived in Florida in 1997 I had

enquired of John Beckner as to the availability of the
long-lipped ladies'-tresses, Spiranthes longilabris. He
related that it was no long a frequent species as much of
the water table had been altered and areas that formerly
supported the species were much drier now. But he did
note that hybrids between S. longilabris and the fragrant
ladies'-tresses, S. odorata were occasionally found.
Luer in his Native Orchids of Florida (1972) also notes that
the two species were frequently growing near each
other.
Subsequent field searches based on herbarium

information yielded greatly altered habitat and no S.
longilabris. After three seasons and about 2000 miles of
searching for S. longilabris we finally found a small
colony in Levy County in November 1999. Stan
Folsom very quickly noted the presence of Spiranthes
odorata nearby and pointed out some plants that
appeared to be intermediate in appearance. Careful
examination of these plants and comparison to the
65
FROM FLORIDA 1.
specimen chosen as the holotype resulted in Spiranthes

xfolsomii. The plant found in 1999 appeared much like
S. odorata but had flowers with slender petals and
narrower leaves indicating the influence of S. longilabris.
The annotations on the holotype are of interest to see

the varying opinions:
[Orig. id.:] Spiranthes brevifolia, Chapm.

United States: Florida: Levy County:
Pine barren ponds, Levy Co.
|CO| Legit, A. P. Garber, M.D., Columbia, Penna.
Oct. 1877
FLAS 69863
[Ann.:] Spiranthes longilabris Lindl.

[Note:] (atypical basal leaves) [pencilled on
annotation: could this be S. laciniata, with the
wrong date (and perhaps other data)?
[Det.:] J. Beckner [Det. date:] Nov 1965
---
[Ann.:] Spiranthes cernua (L.) L.C. Rich. var.
cernua
[Det.:] Daniel B. Ward [Det. date:] Jan 1965
Paul Martin Brown is the Editor of this Journal and a Research

Associate at the University of Florida Herbarium, Florida
Museum of natural History in Gainesville, Florida.
66
BOOK REVIEW: Genera Orchidacearum Volume 1
BOOK REVIEWS:
Genera Orchidacearum Volume 1: General
Introduction, Apostasioideae, Cypripedioideae. 1999.
A. M. Pridgeon, P. J. Cribb, M. W. Chase, and F. N.
Rasmussen, eds. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
16 plates, 55 halftones, 32 line drawings. Hardcover.
214 pages. $75.00.
Mark Whitten
This volume is the first in a planned series of five

to be published over the next five or six years. If you
are seriously interested in orchids, buy it - this series will
become the standard reference on orchid classification
for the first part of the next century. Although not the
only recent classification of the orchid family (at least
seven have appeared in the last 50 years), it promises to
be unique for several reasons. First, this series does not
represent the opinions of one taxonomist. It is the
product of a remarkable collaboration of more than fifty
botanists, each contributing their expertise and insight
to produce a unified, generic-level classification.
Previous classifications have usually been the work of a
single taxonomist, and the resulting classifications differ
considerably. These differences are probably due to the
sheer size and diversity of the family (too great for any
67
single mind) and to the lack of an explicit theory of

classification, resulting in the heavy influence of
personal opinion and intuition. Second, this series is
unique because it is based upon cladistic2 theory and
relies heavily upon DNA sequence data to provide a
framework for the classification. These techniques
provide a level of objectivity that previous classifications
lacked and lay the ground for rational (and polite!)
discussions of orchid taxonomy.
The series is dedicated to Robert Dressler, who

has produced several modern classifications of orchids.
One of Dressler's admirable traits is his non-dogmatic
approach and willingness to incorporate new data; this
flexibility is echoed in Genera Orchidacearum.
Following an introduction by Dressler, the first

volume begins with a series of brief (ca. 10 pp.)
chapters on the history, elements, and science of
classification. These chapters include the history of
orchid classification, morphology, anatomy, palynology,
embryology, seed morphology, cytogenetics, and
molecular systematics. The chapter by Mark Chase on
molecular systematics lucidly explains why the current
flood of DNA sequence data for orchids is so important
in revising our concepts of orchid classification. He
emphasizes that DNA information is not superior to
traditional morphological data for constructing
classifications, but that it is more abundant and far
quicker and easier to collect and analyze than non-
68
molecular data. Until we have much more abundant

information on orchid biology, DNA sequences will
provide our best estimate of evolutionary relationships
that are the foundation for classification. The power of
molecular techniques was recently shown by two
independent DNA studies of Orchis and related genera
(one by Pridgeon and others at Kew and the other by
Aceto and coworkers in Naples, Italy). Although the
two groups worked separately, they independently came
to the same conclusion: that Orchis in the traditional
sense is composed of three unrelated groups, and that
some Orchis species needed to be transferred to
Anacamptis and to Neotinea. This example highlights
what promises to become a recurring theme in our
reclassification of orchids: superficial similarities in
floral morphology (resulting from convergent
pollination syndromes) may be highly misleading of
phylogenetic relationships. Some people will be
displeased by having to re-learn the names of familiar
genera and species as our classifications are restructured
to mirror natural evolutionary units, but this brief
period of upheaval should result in a much more stable
and predictive system that will withstand future
scientific scrutiny.
The remainder of the volume begins the generic

treatments, beginning with the Apostasioideae and
Cypripedioideae. Each generic treatment includes
sections on nomenclature and synonymy, derivation of
the name, description, distribution, infrageneric
classification, anatomy, palynology, cytogenetics,
phylogenetics, ecology, pollination biology, economic
69
uses, and cultivation. The multi-authored nature of the

work is retained even at the generic level; for example,
the treatments of Cypripedium and Paphiopedilum contain
sections written by Cribb, Pridgeon, Cox, and three
other authors. Cladograms chosen from recent
literature summarize the molecular data that serve to
support or refute the various schemes (Cribb's system is
most congruent with the DNA data, in case you're
wondering!). There are no keys or detailed descriptions
of species-- such detail is beyond the stated scope of the
series and would undoubtedly be premature for the vast
majority of orchid genera.
The editors should be commended for the

remarkable task of bringing together so many different
collaborators for this series, and Alec Pridgeon deserves
special recognition for the ultimate responsibility of
collecting and coordinating various authors'
contributions. The second volume (to be published
this year) will be of special interest to lovers of
terrestrial orchids; it will treat the Orchidoideae, which
now includes the spiranthoid clade and most terrestrial
groups. These are exciting times to be studying orchids!
Mark Whitten
Senior Biological Scientist
Florida Museum of Natural History
University of Florida
P.O. Box 117800
Gainesville, FL 32611-7800
Email: whitten@FLMNH.ufl.edu
70
BOOK REVIEW:
Plate 1: Brown/Coleman: Genera Orchidacearum
SCHIEDEELLA Volume 1
ARIZONICA
Arizona red-spot ladies'-tresses
Photos by Ron Coleman
71
Plate 2 - Keenan: CYPRIPEDIUM
Brown: FLORIDA
pink lady's-slipper , Cypripedium acaule

natural light, late p.m., blue cast from shade
P.E. Keenan
Epidendrum
amphistomum
forma rubrifolium
dingy
epidendrum,
red-leaved form
Fakahatchee
Swamp, Florida
P.M. Brown
72
Plate 3 - Brown: FLORIDA
Pteroglossapsis ecristata
forma flava
crestless plume orchid

yellow form
J. & R. Lassiter
Corallorhiza wisteriana forma rubra

Wister's coralroot red form
P.M. Brown
73
BOOK
Plate 3 - Brown: REVIEW: Genera Orchidacearum Volume 1
FLORIDA
Plate 4 - Brown: FLORIDA
top left:
Spiranthes xfolsomii
(S. odorata x S. longilabris)
top right:
Listera australis forma scottii
bottom left:
Listera australis forma viridis
P.M. Brown
74

March 2000 North American Native Orchid Journal

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

March 2000 North American Native Orchid Journal

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

NORTH AMERICAN

NATIVE ORCHID JOURNAL

The Journal welcomes articles, of any length, of both a scientific

2000 Membership in the North American Native Orchid Alliance,

With the beginning of the new century we enter

Mailing and delivery seem to be continuing

Plans for the new Wild Orchids of Florida

Paul Martin Brown

SCHIEDEELLA ARIZONICA: A NEW

This spiranthoid taxon from the southwestern

Schiedeella arizonica P.M. Brown sp. nov. (Fig. 1, 2;

(Photographs: NANOJ 2(2):127 (as S. fauci-sanguinea);

similis Schiedeella fauci-sanguinea (Dod) Burns-Balogh, sed

Similar to Schiedeella fauci-sanguinea (Dod) Burns-Balogh,

PLANT: terrestrial herb, up to 20 cm in height, slender;

elliptical thickened concavity which is rich cinnabar red,

Additional specimens examined:

Pseudotsuga menziesii, Abies concolor, Fraxinus velutina;

16-20 June 1907, J. J. Thornber and Lloyd 4196 (AMES,

pubescent in back throat; sepals and petals pale, semi-

The following specimens were examined and/or

ARIZONA: Cochise County, along Onion Saddle -

HABITAT: dry coniferous forests, hillsides and creek

RANGE: southwestern Arizona (Cochise, Graham,

FLOWERING PERIOD: early May - early June

ETYMOLOGY: arizonica after the State of Arizona

Schiedeella arizonica P.M. Brown has been known,

In 1920 Schlechter segregated several species

Schiedeella, found primarily in southern Mexico, Central

In 1978 Donald Dod described a new species,

southern Mexico and Central America: Schiedeella violacea

Accepting Szlachetko's research that Schiedeella

sanguinea grows from 2-4 cm tall - and plants of S.

Paul Martin Brown, Research Associate, University of Florida

Working with Stan Folsom they are completing work on a

Ronald A. Coleman, 11520 E. Calle del Valle, Tucson AZ 85749

Szlachetko, D. L. 1991. Notes on the genera Schiedeella and

A typical herbarium label showing a variety of

IN ANTICIPATION OF THE GROWING

The growing season for most of temperate North

One of the ways that a person can find out about

For the most inexperienced of us, an herbarium is

specimens and accompanying data about the specimens,

There should be a label affixed to the sheet with

been drastically changed. Sites are cleared for

I can give you a couple of actual examples that

The other example shows the craftiness of the

The people who work in the herbarium are an

status or additional data that has not yet been logged

I hope you will try to make use of the valuable

Nearly all colleges and universities with biology

to make an appointment so a member of the herbarium

If you do not have Internet access, any herbarium

The Marion Ownbey Herbarium

University of Florida Herbarium (FLAS)

The Slow Empiricist

OCCURRENCE OF WILD COCO,

Brian Emanuel, Jo Anna Watson Baber & Mike Beckwith

Wild coco, Eulophia alta, has previously been

Rock Springs Run State Reserve is located south

with further surveying that this species will be found

The populations of wild coco are found in wet

Soil samples were collected at three of the wild