Derek D. Cabactulan, Jim Cootes, Miguel David De Leon, Reynold B. Pimentel, Fernando B. Aurigue, and Neil K. Binayao III
 Bulbophyllum alboaligerum Photo: Miguel D. de Leon  Bulbophyllum crassiusculum Photo: Miguel D. de Leon  Bulbophyllum prasinoglossum Photo: Miguel D. de Leon  Bulbophyllum puberulosum Photo: Miguel D. de Leon  Bulbophyllum vinicolor Photo: Miguel D. de Leon  Epicrianthes charishampliae Photo: Miguel D. de Leon  Epicrianthes jimcootesii Photo: Miguel D. de Leon  Epicrianthes neilkonradii Photo: Miguel D. de Leon | Abstract: (...), Bulbophyllum alboaligerum (sect. Macrocaulia) Cabactulan, Cootes, M.D. De Leon & Pimentel, Bulb. crassiusculum (sect. Stachysanthes) Cabactulan, Cootes, M.D. De Leon & Pimentel, Bulb. prasinoglossum (sect. Brachystachyae) Cabactulan, Cootes, M.D. De Leon, & Pimentel, Bulb. puberulosum (sect. Stachysanthes) Cabactulan, Cootes, M.D. De Leon, & Pimentel, Bulb. vinicolor ( sect. Brachystachyae) Cabactulan, Cootes, Aurigue, Pimentel & M.D. De Leon, (...), Epicrianthes charishampeliae Cabactulan, M.D. De Leon, Cootes & Pimentel, Epicr. jimcootesii Cabactulan, M.D. De Leon & Pimentel, Epicr. neilkonradii Cabactulan, Cootes, M.D. De Leon & Pimentel, (...), are all described as new to science. Bulbophyllum alboaligerum is most similar to Bulb. leproglossum J.J. Vermeulen and Lamb from Borneo. It differs in the edges of the dorsal sepal and the petals, which in Bulb. alboaligerum are slightly erose, whilst the dorsal sepal and petals of Bulb. leproglossum are entire; and the apices of the labellum which in Bulb. alboaligerum is papillose, whereas that of Bulb. leproglossum is glabrous. The lateral sepals are also occasionally adnate as in Bulbophyllum pelicanopsis J.J. Verm & Lamb. Bulbophyllum crassiusculum is most similar to Bulb. unguiculatum Rchb. f., but differs in the shape of the labellum which in Bulb. crassiusculum is sharply curved downwards with a recurving apex, the labellum of Bulb. unguiculatum is evenly curved; the edge of the labellum of Bulb. crassiusculum is minutely ciliate, whereas the edge of the labellum of Bulb. unguiculatum is entire; the petals of Bulb. crassiusculum are lanceolate, whereas the petals of Bulb. unguiculatum are obovate to elliptic. Bulbophyllum prasinoglossum is most similar to Bulb. submarmoratum J.J. Sm., but differs in the much shorter, upright infl orescence of Bulb. prasinoglossum; and the positioning of the ridges on the labellum, which in Bulb. prasinoglossum are in a central position, close together, the central ridges on the labellum of Bulb. submarmoratum are more widely spaced; the petals of Bulb. prasinoglossum are ovate, whereas those of Bulb. submarmoratum are triangular. Bulbophyllum puberulosum is most similar to Bulb. crassiusculum Cabactulan, Cootes, M.D. De Leon and Pimentel, but differs in the size of the flowers, 6 mm across the lateral sepals in Bulb. crassiusculum versus 4.3 mm across the lateral sepals in Bulb. puberulosum; the shape of the leaves in Bulb. crassiusculum are semi-terete, whereas the leaves of Bulb. puberulosum are flattened (this feature has remained constant amongst the flowering plants examined from different localities); and the keel of Bulb. crassiusculum, at its column foot is low and bluntly, broadly triangular when viewed in profi le, whereas the keel of Bulb. puberulosum is more prominent and runs from the centre of the column foot to the column; when viewed from the front it is triangular, raised, and well-demarcated from the column foot. Bulbophyllum vinicolor is most similar to Bulb. hyposiphon from Borneo but differs in the shape of the labellum, which in Bulb. vinicolor is distinctly recurved, with a deep channel lengthwise, whereas the labellum of Bulb. hyposiphon is gently curved; the shape of the stelidia of Bulb. vinicolor are three-toothed at the apex, whereas the stelidia of Bulb. hyposiphon have a single, minute tooth centrally. Epicrianthes charishampeliae is most similar to Bulbophyllum stenomeris J.J. Verm. and O’Byrne, from section Epicrianthes, but differs in the ornamentation of the labellum, which in Epicr. charishampeliae is vesiculate, whereas the labellum of Bulb. stenomeris is almost glabrous; and the column of Epicr. charishampeliae which bears a single, downward-pointing tooth, whereas the column of Bulb. stenomeris bears two, downward-pointing teeth. Epicrianthes jimcootesii is most similar to Epicrianthes davidii, but differs in the number of appendages on the petals, which in Epicr. jimcootesii number up to 10 on each side, whereas the petal appendages of Epicr. davidii number up to 6 only on each side; the labellum of Epicr. jimcootesii is heavily papillose on its sides and underside, whereas the labellum of Epicr. davidii is glabrous. Epicrianthes neilkonradii is most similar to Epicr. aquinoi Cootes, M.D. De Leon and Naive, but differs in surface structure of the labellum which in Epicr. neilkonradii is vesicular to papillose, whereas the labellum surface of Epicr. aquinoi is glabrous; the petal appendages of Epicr. neilkonradii vary from three to fi ve in number (the outer two can be vestigial), whereas the petal appendages of Epicr. aquinoi are always three in number; and the leaves of Epicr. neilkonradii are lanceolate and purplish dark green, whilst those of Epicr. aquinoi are ovate to ovate-cordate and plain green to bright green. Published in OrchideenJournal, Vol. 6-2: 3 - 21 |
