Dendrobium camaridiorum

Distribution and ecology The endemic plant is widespread in humid or gallery forests all over the main island ‘ Grande-Terre’, from 50 to 900 m, but has not been observed in sclerophyll forest (west coast), or in the extreme northwest (Fig. 6). Taxonomic notes Dendrobium camaridiorum produces numerous adventive plantlets (‘ keikis’), which is not the case of D. butinii sp. nov. The long, attenuated leaves with a V-shaped depression on the blade surface are the easiest characters to observe in D. camaridiorum. It is distinguished from D. butinii sp. nov. by the white, very elongated sepals (shorter and green in D. butinii sp. nov.). Leaf anatomy shows D. camaridiorum very similar to D. letocartiorum sp. nov. (see details under D. letocartiorum sp. nov. below). Phenology Flowers are observed throughout the year. It seems that the hours of opening (in the morning) and closing of the flowers (in the afternoon) are synchronous throughout the territory. IUCN status Dendrobium camaridiorum is the most abundant species of the graminoid group in New Caledonia, and was evaluated as Least Concern (LC) by the New Caledonian Red List Authority. Typification Vieillard’s numeration cannot be understood as true collection numbers (Morat 2010). Indeed, he often attributed the same number to different gatherings that he regarded as comprising a single species, however he confused many taxa, thereby generating some nomenclatural problems as many of his collections were chosen as types (see for example Pierre et al. 2014). Comparison of the material deposited at W with a specimen at P that clearly represents the same collection indicates that an error occurred in transcribing the number on the former, which is probably a fragment removed from the original specimen. Labels on the Paris specimen bear the number Vieillard 1332, whereas the sheet at W is numbered 1192, which in fact corresponds to material of Phyllanthus cornutus Baill. (Euphorbiaceae Juss.). The material in Vienna consists of a stem fragment, several leaves, a single, dissected, immature flower, and a drawing of the Paris material. The latter is a tracing of the Paris plant (Hallé, pers. comm.). This interpretation is consistent with Reichenbach’s visit to P in April 1864 (Paris Herbarium Visit Catalogue). Paris’s material comprises a bud and a tuft of 3 stems, and is clearly conspecific with the fragmentary collection at W. We can reasonably assume that Reichenbach studied both P and W material, which would thus represent syntypes. We have selected the material at W as the lectotype as it clearly served as the basis of the description of the flower.