Spiranthes wrightii Ames

Spiranthes wrightii Ames View in CoL , Orchidaceae 7: 131. 1922, nomen nudum; non Spiranthes wrightii (Rchb.f.) Schltr., 1913 .— TYPE: CUBA. Pinal, Monte Verde, 19 Feb. 1859, Wright 1480 (holotype GH No. 1700!).— Schiedeella amesiana Garay, Bot. Mus. Leafl. View in CoL 28: 357. 1922, replacement name for illegitimate Spiranthes wrightii Ames View in CoL , Orchidaceae 7: 131. 1922.— Schiedeella amesiana Garay ex Ackerman, Orchid View in CoL Flora of the Greater Antilles: 476. 2014.

Distribution and Habitat — This is the most widespread species of the genus, having been recorded in Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Mexico, Nicaragua, and Costa Rica. In Mexico it occurs on the Gulf of Mexico slope of the Sierra Madre Oriental and on the Sierra Madre de Chiapas. Terrestrial in leaf litter in moist pine-oak forest and cloud forest from 1,000 to 2,500 m elevation.

Remarks — Critical study of relevant material shows that the Cuban plant described as Schiedeella amesiana Garay is specifically indistinguishable from G. wercklei , and thus we treat it as its synonym. Ackerman (2014) noted that the character used by Szlachetko et al. (2005) to separate Schiedeella amesiana from S. wercklei in their key (flowers erect vs. flowers horizontal, respectively) is inconsistent as it varies depending on the stage of development, which we have corroborated in the field. At anthesis flowers are horizontal, turning erect only as fruits develop. Indeed, we find both concepts inseparable, and the differences in the shape and proportion of the epichile relative to the hypochile used by Ackerman (2014) to distinguish them fall within the variation observed in G. wercklei . It is worthy of note that the concept of Schiedeella amesiana in Szlachetko (1992b) and Szlachetko et al. (2005) represents a mix of different species: figure 23 in Szlachetko (1992b: 186), reproduced as figure 338 in Szlachetko et al. (2005: 204), was based on a Mexican specimen from the type locality of Neottia micrantha , which is selected here as neotype of the latter and assigned by us to Greenwoodiella micrantha var. micrantha (see earlier).

Ames (1922) proposed Spiranthes wrightii as a purported new name for “ Sauroglossum monophyllum Griseb. ” but only as it was represented by specimen Wright 1480, not for the actual taxonomic concept of Grisebach’ s (1866), which was a transfer to Sauroglossum Lindl. of the species previously described by Lindley (1846) as Cranichis monophylla (a genuine member of Cranichis Sw. ). Since Ames (1922) clearly stated that his Spiranthes wrightii was a distinct species from Sauroglossum monophyllum , S. wrightii actually represented a new species instead of a new name, for which Ames failed to provide a diagnosis or description and thus did not fulfill the requisites for valid publication (International Association for Plant Taxonomy, 2012: article 33). Garay (1982) realized that Spiranthes wrightii Ames was a later homonym of Spiranthes wrightii (Rchb.f.) Schltr. , a different species currently considered as Pseudogoodyera wrightii (Rchb.f.) Schltr. , and in turn proposed Schiedeella amesiana as a new name for S. wrightii Ames. It is apparent that Garay, as most subsequent workers, overlooked that Ames mistakenly proposed a “new name” for what he actually considered as a new species. The description of Schiedeella amesiana in Szlachetko (1992b) was based at least partially on material from a different species (here treated as Greenwoodiella micrantha ; see earlier), and it did not include a Latin description or diagnosis. The first work that fulfills the requisites for valid publication of Schiedeella amesiana is that of Ackerman (2014). It included a description in English, and on or after 1 January 2012 a Latin description or diagnosis is no longer a requisite (International Association for Plant Taxonomy, 2012: article 39).

There are two specimens representing Spiranthes wrightii Ames at the Gray Herbarium. One of these bears Wright’ s number “1480a,” and it was labelled by W. Kittredge and J. D. Ackerman as the holotype of Spiranthes wrightii Ames. The second specimen, GH No. 1700, was annotated by Ackerman as “ isotype ” but it bears Wright’ s number “1480” and includes a label in Wright’ s handwriting with information that was literally mentioned by Ames (1922) in the protologue, including a reference to “Pinal,” the collecting date, and descriptive data of the plant. The latter specimen also matches closely Ames’ statement that “The sheet at the Gray Herbarium bears two specimens that represent what may be taken as extremes, the tallest plant being 40 cm tall with nine flowers, the smaller one being 15 cm. high with only two flowers.” Therefore, it is clear that specimen GH No. 1700 (Wright 1480) was the one studied by Ames and it should be regarded as the holotype instead of specimen GH No. 1697 (Wright 1480a).

Additional Specimens Examined — MEXICO. Chiapas: municipio Motozintla, ejido Benito Juárez, terracería de Motozintla a El Porvenir, 2,047 m elev., collected 14 Sept. 2011, flowered in cultivation 31 Jan. 2013, Reyes 7281 ( MEXU, spirit). Oaxaca: municipio San Miguel Chimalapa, Cerro Sabinal (pico occidental del Cerro Guayabitos), al N de la colonia. Díaz Ordaz, ca. 40 km en línea recta al N de San Pedro Tapanatepec , al S de la cima del cerro, Maya 1099 ( CHAPA) ; municipio Concepción Pápalo, ca. 6.5 km en camino de Concepción Pápalo a Yólox, 2,475 m elev., collected Jul. 2004, pressed in cultivation 31 March 2005,