49 A REVIEW OF THE AUSTRALIAN SPECIES OF 8ARC0CHILUS ( ORCHID ACEAE). By the Rev. H. M. R. Rupp, B.A. (One Text-figure.) [Read 27th June, 1951.] Synopsis. Sixteen valid species of the genus are recognized in this review, including one (S. tricalliatus) newly admitted to specific rank. Nine excluded species are listed at the end of the review. Some different conceptions of the character of Sarcochilus are briefly discussed, and a description of the genus as understood by the author is given. The remainder of the paper consists of notes on the individual species. In the case of S. australis Lindl., which F. M. Bailey recorded for Queensland under the synonym S. parviflorus. the author expresses the view that there are no authentic records of this species occurring north of Gosford, N.S.W., and that the Queensland record should probably be applied to S. spathulatus Rogers. Considerable difficulty is experienced in attempting to decide between varying interpretations of the genus Sarcochilus, which Pfitzer places between Grosourdyu Rchb. f. and Dendrocolla BL, in the sub-tribe Aerideae of the tribe Sarcanthinae. The late J. J. Smith, in Blumea, I, 1 (1930), pp. 194-215, described Sarcochilus as distin-guished by a long straight column with a very short foot, and a lip with a very small pit at the base. If this description is to be generally accepted, it seems to me that it will mean the removal of all our Australian species to some other genus or genera. For with the possible exception of S. australis Lindl., they are all distinguished by a short column with a long foot, to which the lateral sepals are usually adnate; and in most instances the "pit" or sac, situated below the mid-lobe of the labellum, is relatively large. As I have not been able to ascertain whether J. J. Smith's interpretation as given above is generally acceptable, in this review I have retained the older conception of the genus, in which the column is short with a long foot. So far as I am aware, no one up to the present has proposed to remove the Australian species on the ground of their incompatibility with J. J. Smith's description. On other grounds, various authors have from time to time transferred to other genera quite a number of Australian plants previously included in Sarcochilus, as will be seen from the list of "Excluded Species" at the end of this review. The latest of these removals is proposed by the present writer in the Victorian Naturalist, Vol. 67 (1951), 206, where Mueller's 8. divitiflorus is made the type of a new genus to be known as Rhinerrhiza. With the exclusion of this plant, there remain sixteen Australian species to be reviewed, viz.: 1, S. Fitzgeraldii; 2, S. Hartmannii; 3, S. falcatus; 4, S. WeinthaUi; 5, S. australis; 6, /Sf. spathulatus; 7, S. olivaceus; 8, 8. Harriganae; 9, S. dilatatus; 10, S. Longnianii; 11, 8. Bancroftii; 12, S. Ceciliae; 13, 8. Hillii; 14, 8. tricalliatus; 15, fif. eriochilus; 16, 8. minutiflos. Before proceeding to review these in detail, however, I -wish to submit the following brief description of the genus itself as I understand it. Sarcochilus R.Br. Epiphytes or rock plants, usually rather small. Stems short. (Exception in Australia, /S. Fitzgeraldii.) Leaves from broadly lanceolate to linear, often more or less falcate and usually distinctly channelled above. Racemes emerging below the leaves. Flowers from a few mm. to 3 cm. in diameter, racemose, often numerous and showy, in some species very fragrant. Sepals and petals approximately equal, free, relatively broad at least in the distal portion, the lateral sepals usually more or less dilated at the base and adnate to the foot of the column. Labellum articulate at the base of the column-foot, spurless, trilobate. Lateral lobes erect, relativel.v large, curving inward;
BioStor
