<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head> <title>Tetragamestus isochiloides Regel</title> <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"/> </head> <body> <p> <i>Tetragamestus isochiloides</i> Regel</p> <p> <i>Index seminum quae Hortus botanicus imperialis Petropolitanus... offert</i>: 20 (Regel 1856a); <i>Annales des Sciences Naturelles, Botanique</i>, série 4, 6: 376 (Regel 1856b). — <i>Scaphyglottis isochiloides</i> (Regel) Foldats, <i>Acta Biologica Venezuelica</i> 2: 381 (Foldats 1959).</p> <p>TYPE. — Samples cultivated at the Botanical Garden of St. Petersburg (Russia) from samples collected in Colombia by Reinhart Frans van Lansberge: “ <i>Lansberg misit plantas vivas e Columbia</i> ” (sic), <i>s.d.</i>, <i>s.coll.</i> (<i>legit</i> E. Regel), <i>s.n.</i> (holo-, LE [LE00011187]).</p> <p>REMARKS</p> <p>Regel’s original descriptions of <i>Tetragamestus isochiloides</i> and its synonym <i>S. arundinacea</i> (1856a, 1856b) are close enough to that of <i>S.punctulata</i> (Adams B.R., <i>adnot.in herb.</i> LE); Nir2000, 2014; Bogarín <i>et al.</i> 2014) and by inference to that of <i>I. pauciflorus</i>, so these taxa are considered synonyms. For the description of <i>S. isochiloides</i>,Foldats reused the diagnosis of the basionym, although he did not see type material (Foldats 1970). Despite this, for Szlachetko & Kolanowska (2014), <i>S. isochiloide</i> s is a full species and is differently treated from <i>S.punctulata</i>. However, they made no statement about their key of identification for <i>S. isochiloides</i>, but from the photographs of voucher specimens (K000079638, LE00011187 and LE00011188), we see nothing in the appearance of the stems, leaves and the flower that can separate these two taxa, and we agree with Adams who identified the type of <i>T. isochiloides</i> as a <i>S. punctulata</i> (Adams B. R., <i>adnot. in herb.</i> LE).</p> </body> </html>