![Thumbnail: [Volume 7, 1874 page 352]](/journals/rsnz/images/rsnz_07/thumbnails/rsnz_07_00_0418_0352_ac_02.gif)
Art. LI.—On Pterostylis squamata in New Zealand.
[Read before the Auckland Institute, 27th July, 1874.]
For the discovery of this singular plant in New Zealand, we are indebted to the late Dr. Sinclair, so well known for his successful researches into the natural history of this country. Specimens collected by him in some locality near Auckland were forwarded to Sir W. Hooker at Kew, about twenty-four years ago; and accordingly we find the plant described in the first volume of the Flora Novæ-Zealandiæ. Nearly the same description is reproduced in the more recently issued Handbook, but with no additional habitats attached. Unfortunately, no precise record appears to have been preserved of the station in which it was found; and consequently, on Dr. Sinclair's decease, the species became entirely lost to New Zealand botanists. Since then, although the vicinity of Auckland has been repeatedly searched, no traces of its presence have been observed, nor, until a few months ago, had it been found elsewhere in the colony. As the plant must undoubtedly be considered one of the rarest members of the New Zealand flora, and as it is structurally one of the most interesting, it seems not out of place to put the fact of its rediscovery on record.
During a recent visit to the Thames, while examining the low clay hills which skirt the river immediately behind the native settlement of Kapu, I observed a solitary Pterostylis, that on inspection proved to be the long-lost P. squamaia. On a further search two more specimens were found, but both of these were barren. Unfortunately the time at my disposal was not sufficient to enable me to make a complete examination of the district, and to
![Thumbnail: [Volume 7, 1874 page 353]](/journals/rsnz/images/rsnz_07/thumbnails/rsnz_07_00_0419_0353_ac_02.gif)
ascertain definitely if the plant is abundant or rare in this, the only locality in New Zealand of which we have now any certain knowledge of its occurrence. It seems most probable, though, that it will prove to be far from common although isolated specimens will doubtless be met with.
Pterostylis squamata can be distinguished from its congeners in New Zealand by the very obvious character of the lateral sepals being turned downwards, instead of being erect. This distinction has been made use of to divide the genus into two sections; the first, Antennœa, to which the majority of the Australian and New Zealand species belong, having the sepals erect; the second, Latochiuis, which includes our plant, having them deflexed Another excellent character is afforded by the labellum, which is filiform and hangs out of the mouth of the flower. It is also clothed throughout its whole length with copious golden-yellow hairs, except at the apex, where it bears a curious large purple gland, which has been aptly compared to the head of a nail.
Although Pterostylis squamata is rare and local in New Zealand, it is comparatively common in Tasmania, and is also found in Victoria and South-Western Australia. In this respect it agrees with Epacris purpurascens and Leucopogon richei, both of which are abundant Australian-plants, and both of which are confined to limited areas in New Zealand.
It is worth remarking that the affinity existing between the temperate Australian and New Zealand floras, easily recognised except in a few anomalous instances, is perhaps more clearly shown in the Orchideæ of the two countries, than in any other order of equal extent. Thus, in examining the distribution of the eighteen genera found in New Zealand, we find that no less than sixteen also occur in Australia, while the two remaining ones, although peculiar to New Zealand, are yet closely related to Australian forms. This result, striking in itself, becomes more so if we look closely into it, when it appears that out of the sixteen, six are absolutely peculiar to the two countries, and six others, although possessing outlying species in the Indian Archipelago or Pacific Islands, yet plainly have their head-quarters in Australia and New Zealand. Pterostylis is a good instance of this. It has twenty-four species in Australia, and seven in New Zealand. One of the Australian species extends into New Caledonia, but beyond this the genus is endemic in the two countries.
In the sixth volume of the Flora Australiensis, recently issued, I observe that Mr. Bentham considers the true P.squamata of R. Brown to be a form only of the P. rufa of the same author; and the plant to which the specific name of squamata has been, in many instances, applied by later botanists, is referable to a species long ago described by Dr. Lindley. If this view should meet with the general acceptation of botanists, as seems likely, our plant will in future bear the name of Pterostylis barbata, Lindley.