April’s theme was yellow and orange. All of the entries proved to be spring flowering. There were several Diuris. Claire Chesson, Rob Pauley and John Fennel all entered D. orientis; Les Nesbitt and Rob Pauley D. behrii and Pauline Meyer D. corymbosa from Western Australia. Pauline also entered Caladenia caesaria subsp. maritima and John Thelymitra benthamiana.
The winning picture was Les Nesbitt’s D. behrii (Cowslip Orchid) which occurs in Victoria, New South Wales, Australian Capital Territory whilst in South Australia it is rated as vulnerable.
Les Nesbitt has been working on a recovery project of these orchids for Hillgrove Resource’s flagship, the Kanmantoo Copper Mine, located almost 55 KM from Adelaide. As this orchid is often mentioned in NOSSA Journals, it might be worthwhile looking at the person after whom this species was named.
First collected by German born Dr Hans Herman Behr (1818 – 1904) who first visited* South Australia in 1844 when the colony was barely 8 years old. During his two years in South Australia he became the first person to systematically study our botany and entomology sending reports and samples back home. The results of his observations were published in various journals, and many of his collections were named and described by other botanists including his friend, Diedreich von Schlechtendal (1794 – 1866) who named Diuris behrii after Hans.
Hans Behr was an interesting man. A man of many aptitudes; medical doctor, entomologist, anthropologist, botanist, duellist, socialist, poet, novelist, linguist, member of the Bohemian Club of San Francisco and a man of wit. From the many reminiscences written about him, it would appear that he was a likeable gentleman and a generous teacher.
Unfortunately, not everyone liked him because “he was a sworn enemy of all scientific humbug, of quacks and false pretenders” and “he never refrained from expressing his opinion of them, quite regardless of person or station” but his humour shone forth in dealing with them. Once he named a “particularly obnoxious louse” after one of his enemies.
Behr revisited South Australia in 1848 during which time he became acquainted with German-Australian botanist, Ferdinand von Meuller. He maintained friendship with many of the scientific men of the time including Ferdinand Mueller and it was through this friendship that many Australian plants were introduced into California where Behr later settled after his travels.
Though the study of butterflies was his first and enduring love, he is remembered and honoured in Australia for his botanical interests. Of the twenty-two plants named after Behr, two are orchids: Diuris behrii and Arachnorchis behrii (synonym Caladenia behrii).
*The Journal incorrectly stated that he visited South Australia with his friend, Diedreich von Schlechtendal. This did not happen. As far as I am aware Schlechtendal did not visit South Australia.
“The person who first records the whole pollination event will be very lucky indeed.” So wrote Bob Bates (South Australia’s Native Orchids, 2011). He was referring to the pollination event for Bearded Greenhoods in the genus Plumatichilos. As with many orchids there has always been a lot of conjecture about the pollination strategy involved so it is good to finally have photographic evidence of a previously unknown pollinator.
For several years now Rudie Kuiter, Mitchell Findlater-Smith and Rober Lindhe have been researching the relationship between orchids and insects, spending much time in the field observing and photographing the insects. Finally they have managed to obtain a photograph of a pollinator but it was not one of their photographs. Instead it was Neil Blair who took the photograph and observed a dagger fly pollinating a Plumatichilos. The male of these fascinating insects catches another insect and offers it for a nuptial gift to a female in order to be accepted as a mate. The photographs are amazing. It’s worth reading the paper Pollination of the Bearded Greenhoods (Orchidaceae) by Dagger Flies (Diptera: Empididae) just to see the pictures.
Each month the Native Orchid Society of South Australia has a special speaker. April’s speaker was Mark Bachmann from Glenelg Nature Trust. He spoke on the The Hydrological Restoration of Glenshera Swamp, Stipiturus Conservation Park.
At time of settlement swamps were common on the Fleurieu Peninsula but now they have almost all but disappeared. This has come about because of the clearing of land for farming beginning in the 1940s. There are now very few swamps left in the area. As a result in this region, the swamp orchids potentially face extinction.
BUT Mark’s talk was a good news story. In April, the Glenelg Nature Trust with the help of the Conservation Volunteers Australia (a Green Army program) began the work of reinstating the original creek by the judicious placing of regulating structures along the principal drain.
The good news is that the water returned as they were building the structures.
It was also a good news story because of the cooperation of different groups including a local land owner who was willing to have some of their land returned to swamp and no longer be available for their horses to graze.
We look forward to seeing the swamp refill and learning how the orchids respond.
Below are some of the orchids found at Stipiturus. Click on the images to go to the three articles documenting the work at Glenshera Swamp.
Previously we have posted about photographing orchids for identification – see here and here. But sometimes all that is desired is a beautiful picture of these exquisite flowers. Recently, March 21, 2017, National Geographic published just such an article titled How to Photograph an Orchid. Author Alexa Keefe relates some tips from German photographer Christian Ziegler. Needless to say half of the images featured are Australian orchids.
Below is a selection of some of the entries to NOSSA’s monthly picture competition.
Leo Davis always has some interesting insights from his orchid observations. In this article he examines the position of the tepals (petals and sepals) in particular the Moose Orchid which he saw for the first time this year.
Have a close look, next season (winter to early summer) at some of our native lilies. Start with the jolly bulbine lily (Bulbine bulbosa), no longer a true lily incidentally, because it now resides in family Aspodelaceae, along with the grass trees. You will find three yellow petals at 12, 4 and 8 o’clock and closely behind them three almost identical sepals at 2, 6 and 10 o’clock, so at first sight you see six apparently identical tepals (sepals and petals). Move on to the rush fringe-lily (Thysanotus juncifolius), as described in Ann Prescott’s ‘It’s Blue With Five Petals’. Clive Chesson is more up to date and tells me it is now T. racemoides. Again it is no longer a true lily, now sitting in family Asparagaceae. Here the tepals are noticeably different. Three wide densely fringe edged petals will be found, if you view the flower face on, at 12, 4 and 8 o’clock. The narrow non fringed sepals sit close behind at 2, 6 and 10 o’clock. These are just a generalisations because if the flower turns only about 60o a sepal will be at the top.
Most orchids, while close relatives of the true lilies and the one time lilies, do not show these arrangements. Let’s start with some that do.
In the large duck orchid (Caleana major) the petal at 12 o’clock, the dorsal petal, is modified, as in most, but as usual, not all, orchids, to become a labellum. In this charmer the labellum takes the form of a duck’s head. Its function is to snap down trapping a pollinator insect in the cup shape column below it, forcing it into contact with the sticky off white stigma and/or the yellow pollinia below it. Look closely and you will find the other two narrow petals drooping at around 4 and 8 o’clock. Two folded, twisted sepals can be clearly seen at around 1 and 11 o’clock. The third sepal, at 6 o’clock, is tucked in behind the cup shaped column. Note that, as with lilies, the top tepal is a petal.
Caleana major, Knott Hill NFR Photographer: Leo Davis
The leek orchids (genus Prasophyllum) follow this pattern and also have their labellum at around 12 o’clock. These orchid groups, which are up the right way, are said to be ‘not upside down’, using the technical term ‘non resupinate’.
Most orchids are ‘upside down’ and are called resupinate. The whole flower rotates 180o, clockwise or anti I don’t know, at the embryonic stage. But let’s start with somewhat of an exception with the sun orchids (genus Thelymitra) which do not have a petal modified as a labellum. But they are indeed upside down.
Have a close look at the Thelymitra benthamiana flower. Note that the three petals, at roughly 2, 6 and 10 o’clock, are in front of the three slightly larger but very similar sepals, at 12, 4 and 8 o’clock.
Note that the toptepal is a sepal. The flower is upside down, that is resupinate. In most orchids the petal at 6 o’clock would be modified to be a labellum.
Thelymitra benthamiana, Scott Creek CP; Photographer: Leo Davis
The Arachnorchis (possibly Caladenia to you) stricta, from Sherlock, out in the mallee, is more typical of terrestrial orchids in SA. It is upside down, that is resupinate, and has a petal modified to be a labellum.
The bottom petal has become a wide labellum, with fine edge combs and parallel rows of rich plum coloured calli covering its centre. Out at roughly 3 o’clock is a narrow petal, the other invisible on the other side. At the top, pressed tightly against the column, a sepal arches forward. Two larger sepals extend down at around 5 and 7 o’clock.
Arachnorchis stricta, Sherlock; Photographer: Leo Davis
When I saw my first, my only, moose orchid, this season, I was in such a state of excitement that it looked to me to be up the right way, that is to say upside down.
Cryptostylis subulata, Stipiturus CP; Photographer: Leo Davis
Have a look. Two narrow short roughly vertical petals at about 1 and 11 o’clock. There are two sepals at just past 3 and just before 9 o’clock. That’s OK but where is the other sepal? Are there it is, where it should be, at midday. But hang on, it’s behind the flower stem (peduncle) and where is the column?
Cyrtostylis subulata with labellum lifted; Photographer: Leo Davis
Holding the labellum up with a stick I found the column, the stigma and the pollinia, underneath the labellum. The third sepal now appears to be at 6 o’clock. And it all became clear. This flower was up the right way (non resupinate) but it has turned forward, on its peduncle, by about 180o, to become upside down, but not in the manner of resupinate flowers, because it is back to front. It is an inverted non resupinate flower. Still with me?
At this time of the year there are not many orchids flowering in South Australia but one that is just finishing is Spiranthes alticola. The genus Spiranthes, commonly known as Ladies Tresses, is found throughout Australia, Eurasisa and the Americas.The following description is an extract from South Australia’s Native Orchids 2011 DVD which is available from the Native Orchid Society of South Australi.
Spiranthes alticola D.L.Jones
Swamp Spiral Orchid
Etymology: The name alticola means high dweller, referring to its distribution in Eastern Australia, in west Victoria and South Australia’s South East. It also grows near sea level.
Synonyms: Previously included in Neottia australis R. Br., S. sinensis (Pers.) Ames and S. australis R.Br.
ASCII
(These two pictures show the variation in colour.)
Description:Leaves 3-5, narrow lanceolate, shiny, erect at the base, to 15 cm long. Flowerstem to 45 cm tall, slender, flexible, with several sheathing bracts. The flowers are numerous in a dense spiral, pink with a white labellum, rarely all white. Segments are 6-10 mm long, sepals somewhat triangular, petals lanceolate, together forming a short tube, the tips free and recurved, and the lateral sepals divergent. Labellum with a broad, decurved crisped, pellucid mid-lobe, side-lobes erect small. The flowers are faintly fragrant.
(Leaves of Spiranthes alticola)
Flowering: Dec – Jan – Feb.
Similar Species:S. australis, S. sp. Late selfing-white.
Distribution:SL, KIx, SE; NSW, Vic, Tas.
Confined in South Australia to a few high rainfall, near coastal, often mountain locations, southward from the Adelaide Hills in the Southern Lofty region, extinct on Kangaroo Island, (one record only), and South East; also in New South Wales, Victoria and Tasmania.
Habitat: Restricted to peaty bogs and swampy creek-sides, often in locations that are inundated throughout winter; in some areas surviving in paddocks grazed by stock.
Distinguishing Features: S. australis, which is from the eastern states and is not strictly a swamp plant, has smaller darker pink flowers with a narrow labellum.
The two South Australian forms treated here are regarded as distinct species as where they are sympatric they begin flowering at different times and do not intergrade. S.alticola is the more delicate of the two.
Notes: The best specimens are found on mowed firebreaks adjacent to swamps.When vegetative reproduction produces two clonal plants next to each other the spiral arrangement of one is often a mirror image of the other. See Gallery.
Native bee pollinators work the spikes from the bottom upward but as the stigma becomes receptive well after the pollinia have matured this mechanism helps ensure outcrossing.
Plants do well in cultivation if kept moist over summer.
Conservation Status:
Status in Legislation: Not listed nationally, rare in South Australia.
Suggested Status: Rare in South Australia but more common in the Eastern States
Ten years ago, the then NOSSA secretary, Cathy Houston, wrote an article reflecting upon orchid name changes. Since then there have been more name changes. The issues she raised then are still pertinent today. Whilst we continue to learn more about our orchids, name changes are going to happen.
NOSSA Journal Volume 31 No 2 March 2007
HAVE OUR ORCHIDS CHANGED? Cathy Houston (Secretary)
This month the Native Orchid Society of South Australia celebrates its thirtieth “birthday”. A review of the first five years of the Society’s Newsletters/Journals (yes, they were newsletters in the earliest days) reveals some interesting points. By 1979 “A total of 110 species [of orchids] and 14 varieties” were accepted. The following are some interesting aspects about the knowledge of, and what was then current thinking about, our orchids at that time. It must be remembered that no comprehensive book on South Australian orchids existed in those days, especially not any field guides. The most useful “tools” the members had to work with were Blacks Flora of South Australia and W.H. Nicholls “Orchids of Australia”. In 1979 “A Checklist of Orchidaceae on South Australia” by J.Z. Weber: Changes introduced in the new ‘Black’s Flora” by R. Bates, appeared as a full issue of the Native Orchid Society of South Australia Journal.
Today we sometimes struggle to grasp all the fine differences when orchid species, or species groups, are split, but spare a thought for those wanting to identify with what they have seen in the field back in about 1979. An article by R. Bates describes the “Variations within the species Caladenia dilatata R.Br. in South Australia”. “There are, at present, two recognised varieties” viz. C. dilatata var. dilatata and C. dilatata var. concinna. Within these two varieties are further more divisions into distinct sub-varieties or races! At that time there were six distinct forms recognised; how much easier today, now that they are named as species. These would now include C. tentaculata, C. verrucosa, C. stricta, C. toxochila and C. conferta.
Arachnorchis tentaculata (King spider Orchid) syn Caladenia tentaculata
Recognition of what could be species has long been apparent. Take for example the article written in 1980 about two forms of Pterostylis nana, viz. what we commonly refer to as the ‘Hills’ form and the ‘Mallee’ form. This article documents the obvious morphological differences and illustrates this with line drawings and a map showing distributions of the two. Electronic Orchids of S.A. currently recognises five possible species of P. nana for South Australia. These are probably all un-named, since David Jones, in “Native Orchids of Australia”, does not recognise true P. nana in our state. Similarly, an article written in 1981 discusses the P. alata – scabra – robusta complex. The author recognises there are “at least four species of this group in South Australia”. This is the first time the authors acknowledge they should be elevated to species, not just accepted as varieties or forms. At that time P. robusta was treated at varietal level, viz. P. scabra var. robusta or P. alata var. robusta. Ultimately most of these have been elevated to species level (P. dolichochila, P. erythroconcha, P. robusta, and P. striata).
It was noted that in 1978 David Jones and Ray Nash were currently working on Pterostylis. Further to that Les Nesbitt notes that of the sixty or so Pterostylis in Australia, South Australia has twenty-two species. One wonders what the count is now. It is well known that David Jones is currently/still working on the Pterostylis group, with more species being recognised regularly.
Thelymitra x irregularis or Pink Spotted Sun Orchid was photographed in 2009 near Macclesfield
In a series of articles produced about “Our rarest orchids” in 1977 we find the comment “Very few of our orchids are thought to be extinct… . “One wonders what that number would be considered to be today. The same article talks about the demise of Pterostylis cucullata and the possibility that it may no longer exist in the wild. Certainly this is one of our highly endangered species for which recovery actions are being undertaken these days. [N.O.S.S.A. members have an opportunity to assist with this work starting on April 14th – see diary dates.] In 1977 there was excitement when, following a field trip to Belair National Park one member returned the following day and “the elusive Pterostylis cucullata” was seen “growing in association with P. curta”. In 1981, following a discussion and review of endangered orchids in South Australia, R. Bates writes “There are a number of endangered species in S.A. which have not yet been named. It is not unlikely that some of these will become extinct before they are even described properly.” With such a large number of as yet undescribed orchids in our state, let us hope this does not happen.
Naturally occurring hybrids and the naming of such, has been debated regularly within botanical circles. In 1978 this insight is shown by Ray Nash who “guided us to a nearby patch of Thelymitramacmillanii,…… Ray’s view is that this will probably turn out to be a hybrid, possibly between antennifera (which it closely resembles) and rubra or luteocilium.” In 1980 T. decora [T. x truncata] was featured as one of South Australia’s rarest orchids. It was thought to be of hybrid origin and three forms were recognised then. The probable parents were T. ixioides x T. longifolia, T. ixioides x T. pauciflora, and T. ixioides x T. mucida. Today with the naming of many species within the T. pauciflora complex, it is now being recognised that there are even more combinations producing similar type flowers, e.g. T. juncifolia, which gives rise to the spotted features, x T. brevifolia.
Name changes always raise controversy. A brief explanation giving some insight into this complex area can be picked up when an author is expanding on the front cover illustration of Corybas. “In fact, they should never have been called Corybas in the first place. They were discovered by Robert Brown during the Flinders Expedition (1801 – 1805), and illustrated by the Austrian Ferdinand Bauer, another of the members of the expedition. Brown called them Corysanthes from the Greek “korys” (a helmet) and “anthos” (a flower), and they were known for many years by that name. However, in this instance, justice was never truly done, because the decision was made to call them Corybas, the name previously allotted by R.A. Salisbury in 1805, on the strength of seeing Bauer’s illustrations.” More recent times have seen that injustice righted with the name reverting to Corysanthes, something brought about through the work of David Jones. Similarly, the latest naming of Corunastylis tepperi follows this, The International Code of Botanical Nomenclature, a name that was recognised by R. Bates in an article written in 1981! However, Bates concludes that P. tepperi and P. nigricans are synonymous, so the latter prevails, but “further work needs to be done”! He is also the author of an article depicting some name changes in 1980. If our readers are confused by “new” names, then just think what it was like for those in 1980 when, among others, Caladenia carnea, and all its five varieties, is changed to C. catenata, with all its varieties, two of which are C.catenata var. gigantea and C. catenata var. minor. Two others were elevated to C. pusilla and C. alba.
Corysanthes diemenica (Veined Helmet Orchid)
At one time our esteemed orchidologist was asked to comment on a list of name changes being proposed for the revision of Black’s Flora of S.A. “My first reaction was to state that everyone would be happiest if no changes were made”! However, in fairness to that gentleman, it must be said that by the time he had worked through a lengthy consultation with botanists covering much of Australasia, a revision of type specimens and other material and associated literature, he was clearly of the opinion that the changes were warranted.
Have our orchids changed? Maybe, but what has really changed is our knowledge and understanding of these unique plants. Based on that knowledge, opinions, attitudes and ideas have changed. Thirty years ago it was not “policy to differentiate between the numerous forms of C. patersonii in this State …” Today we have numerous named species in this complex, without actually any Caladenia patersonii as such.
The final word must come from Peter Hornsby when he said “The ultimate aim should be for the reader to know which plant is being discussed, rather than whether or not the title is absolutely correct.”
References:
Native Orchid Society of South Australia Journal.
1. 1977 Vol. 1 #5
2. Vol. 1 #9
3. 1978 Vol. 2 #2
4. Vol. 2 #6
5. Vol. 2 #7
6. 1979 Vol. 3 #1
7. Vol. 3 #6
8. Vol. 3 #9
10. 1980 Vol. 4. #3
11. Vol. 4 #4
12. Vol. 4 #6
13. Vol. 4 #7
14. 1981 Vol. 5 #1
15. Vol. 5 #3
16. Vol. 5 #4
17. Vol. 5 #6
Black J.M. 1978. Flora of South Australia, Part 1, Third Edition. Handbooks Committee, South Australia.
Jones David L. 2006. A Complete Guide to Native Orchids of Australia, Including the Island Territories. Reed New Holland, Australia.
Nicholls, W. H. 1969. Orchids of Australia; The Complete Edition. Thomas Nelson, Australia.
There is a lot of information on the web about treating scale, some relevant to a specific country, some accurate, some not and much that is contradictory.
The following information is based upon treatment methods that the Native Orchid Society of South Australia (NOSSA) growers have found most effective.
WHAT IS SCALE?
Scale are tiny sap sucking insects of which there are several species in Australia. The female adults build a shield-like cover for protection. The shields are often brown but can be white or red. The shield can be up to 3mm in size. Once a shield is built the adult does not move about but stays in the one position. Ants farm scale as they exude a honeydew sap, a food source for the ants.
Immature scale or crawlers do move about. These can be a different colour from the adult eg juvenile brown scale can be yellow, other species can have grey juveniles. They are lightweight no more than 1mm and easily windborne.
The life cycle is short, and for many species, within a month there is a new generation of scale. Scale multiply rapidly.
Scale tend to attack epiphytic orchids. Evergreen terrestrial orchids may be affected but not the deciduous ones.
EFFECTS OF NOT TREATING SCALE:
Apart from making the plants look ugly, scale left unchecked can
infect other plants
weaken the plant leading to death of the plant
make the plant worthless for shows
develop secondary infection of sooty mould
treating the scale will treat the mould
Left untreated the new growth will eventually become infected
Quarantine and treat new plants before introducing them to the orchid collection
newly acquired plant can be a major source of scale infestation
for thoroughness, use both a contact and systemic spray (see below Types of Sprays)
Preventive spraying
schedule spraying 2 – 4 times a year
Consider relocating ferns if they are under orchid benches as this can often be a host for brown scale.
Control ants
If free-standing bench or hanging pots are free of scale and plants are not touching any other surface than applying Vaseline around each of the feet/lower part of the hooks will prevent ants and crawlers from moving into the area.
Vaseline is waterproof and so will be effective for a long time.
SCALE PREDATORS:
Biological control alone appears to be ineffective but the following is a list of known predators
Crypotlaemus montrouzieri Native ladybird feed on mealybugs and felt scale
Mallada signata, Green Lace Wings, feed on aphids, spider mites, various scales, mealybugs, moth eggs and small caterpillars
Chilocorus beetles
Aphystis wasp species
TREATMENT:
Scale are hard to eliminate entirely. Vigilance and persistence are important factors in controlling scale.
Treatment works either by
a direct contact spray whereby the insect is suffocated by smothering. This is effective for all stages of the life cycle but particularly for the adult under its shield.
an application of a systemic chemical.
or a combination of both.
For treatment to be effective the leaves (both upper and underside), crevices, sheaths, pseudobulbs, stems must be thoroughly drenched with the spray of choice.
Types of Sprays
Contact Sprays
Whatever type of contact spray used, treat every 2 weeks for three treatments
Soapy Water (for those who like using home-made remedies)
Using pure soap (not detergent), suds up a bar in a bowl of water, and pour into a spray bottle.
The Native Orchid Society of SA has been involved with the Threatened Orchid Project which is attempting to propagate some of our most threatened orchids. There has been some success such as Thelymitra epicaptoides (Metallic Sun Orchids) but others are proving elusive. Marc Freestone, from the Orchid Conservation Project, Royal Botanic Gardens Victoria, is a PhD student who is researching one such difficult to grow orchid genus, the Prasophyllum.
Prasophyllum murfettii (Denzel’s Leek Orchid)
To assist with his research Marc has the sent the following request.
CAN ANYONE GROW LEEK ORCHIDS?
South Australia has about 40 species and Victoria about 74 species of the native Leek Orchids, Prasophyllum. Some are on the brink of extinction.
A major problem hampering efforts to prevent our Leek Orchids from going extinct is that they have proven next to impossible to grow in cultivation. They have proved extremely difficult, usually not germinating at all, or germinating but then dying soon after. Occasionally some success has been had (particularly with symbiotic germination) but successful germination trials to our knowledge have so far proved un-repeatable. Working out how to grow Prasophyllum is critical for the survival of many species at risk of extinction across southern Australia.
To try and change this, I will be studying Prasophyllum and their relationships with symbiotic mycorrhizal fungi.
But I need your help!
I am wanting to hear from as many people as possible who
have tried (either successfully or unsuccessfully) to grow Leek Orchids or the closely related Midge Orchids (Corunastylis).
have observed Leek Orchids (or Midge Orchids) recruiting from seed in the wild.
If you can help, or know of anyone who might be worth talking to, please contact me at: marc.freestone@rbg.vic.gov.au or 0428 304 299.
(Funding and support for this project: Australian National University, Federal Government National Environmental Science Programme, Royal Botanic Gardens Victoria, University of Tasmania).
I would encourage people to contact Marc with whatever information that you have, no matter how insignificant you may think it is. Every little bit helps including unsuccessful attempts.
His eventual aim is to be able to work out how to grow them reliably from seed in cultivation.
Orchid names are contentious. The reasons appear to be complex but whatever the reasons the situation exists whereby some orchidologists are naming species that may or may not be accepted by others. The result is that there are publications using different names for the same species. And of course, in the midst of it all, are those names that have been accepted for previous species with phrase names or manuscript names.
Whatever the name, it is helpful then to be able to match them up. Last week’s blog covered South Australian names but in the same week Andrew Brown published on the Western Australian Native Orchid Conservation Study Group Facebook an updated list of WA orchids whereby he has linked them with significant WA Orchid field guide books.
Andrew has kindly given permission for this list to be published. Other lists are also included and these are available on the NOSSA’s Orchid eBook page.
It is worth reading Andrew’s introduction in ALIGNMENT of WESTERN AUSTRALIAN DIURIS AND PTEROSTYLIS NAMES.
The object of this exercise is to align the phrase names in these three publications with names published in recent taxonomic papers. Please note that most, but not all, currently recognized (described and undescribed) Western Australian Diuris and Pterostylis are included. There are other taxa that may be considered worthy of recognition but have not been included at this time as we feel further research is required.
In the case of phrase names, these are added and removed for taxa as new information comes to hand and should not be thought of as the final view. Rather, these should be thought of as current thinking that may change in the future. Taxa are only formally recognized as being distinct once their scientific names are published. Even then, later thinking may result in further changes.
Given that phrase names are a work in progress, some may think that we should not be promoting their use and that they should not be included in popular books. However, I think it is worthwhile putting them out to the wider audience so that their distinctiveness can be debated. Having a large group of people looking for (and at) these taxa provides us with a great deal of information and opinion based on firsthand experience in the field, that we may not otherwise have obtained. Then, if and when the taxon is formally described, it will be done on a much more informed basis.
As I am sure you are aware, the naming plants is an evolving process and there will be further changes as new information comes to light.
NOSSA 