Spiranthes sinensis

It must be remembered that it is matter of taxonomic judgement (and not a simple issue of names), as the two species were originally described as distinct species (they have distinct types). For those who consider the differences are not enough would treat them under single species S. sinensis. Those who think (like original authors) that differences are sufficient, and are also trying to detect further differences to strengthen their distinct identity, would consider them as two separate species. I think … is just trying to do that, trying to settle the riddle, and he being a world renowned Orchid specialist is both qualified to do that. More so he owes the duty of resolving it for us. Let us appreciate that.
.

S. sinensis is not supposed to be pubescent originally. But your plant seems pubescent. S. australis and S. hongkongensis have pubescent to glandular hairs.

---

It has been written in different sense sir. Often densly pubescent hairs with reference to sinensis which was often present with densely pubescent hairs.
So they made a new species of the one which had hairs.
I have not met Mrs Barretto but happened to have met Dr Sun recently. She is the one who evoked my doubts.

---

Thanks. I am quoting your two statements from this thread.

Earlier

“S. sinensis is not supposed to be pubescent originally. But your plant seems pubescent.”
Now
“Often densly pubescent hairs with reference to sinensis which was often present with densely pubescent hairs.”
Both are not same quotes. Isn’t it?

---

There is a reason why I said that. Because,

1. People think that Spiranthes sinensis is often pubescent so they described both glabrous one and the non glabrous one as S. sinensis.

2. But according to the original descriptions only the glabrous one should have been Spiranthes sinensis.
3. On the contrary, Spiranthes australis and Spiranthes hongkongensis are pubescent and sometimes even with glandular hairs. So the plant with hairs from India cant be sinensis.

---

Quoting the original text

Since it (i.e.Spiranthes honkongensis) was first described, this species has largely been ignored by subsequent authors who have referred it to synonymy of Spiranthes sinensis. However, Hu and Barretto (Chung Chi J. 13(2): 4–6. 1976) identified the often densely glandular pubescent rachis, glandular pubescent floral bracts and sepals, and the broad, distinctly 3-lobed stigma as clear morphological characters that distinguish it from S. sinensis.

—
“Often densely glandular pubescent rachis” is for S. honkongensisnot for S.sinensis. “Often” is with meaning in this line. I repeat Often is not synonym for Always.

---

I wish we keep the thread an academic one only. Here is the information I have:

In Flora of British India the species was described under the name Spiranthes australis (R. Br.) Lindl., A species name (rather combination) proposed in 1824, based on Neottia australis R. Br. (1810), a species supposed to have pubescent inflorescence spike (it is also supposed to have pubescent bracts and floral parts partly as I read from other sources).

Spiranthes sinensis (Pers.) Ames, is a name (rather combination) given in 1908, based on Neottia sinensis Pers. (1807), a species described from China and differing in glabrous spikes (and bracts and floral parts).

It has recently been considered by most authors (including Flora of China, Flora of Pakistan, etc.) that these two taxa are synonyms, and as basionym of latter is dated earlier, Spiranthes sinensis is accepted name.

It must be remembered that it is matter of taxonomic judgement (and not a simple issue of names), as the two species were originally described as distinct species (they have distinct types). For those who consider the differences are not enough would treat them under single species S. sinensis. Those who think (like original authors) that differences are sufficient, and are also trying to detect further differences to strengthen their distinct identity, would consider them as two separate species. I think … is just trying to do that, trying to settle the riddle, and he being a world renowned Orchid specialist is both qualified to do that. More so he owes the duty of resolving it for us. Let us appreciate that.

---

.

---

The Spiranthes Connection!!: Just wanted to share.

This, Spiranthes issue was raised by … and his PhD supervisor here at HK and very interestingly, just few days before meeting Prof. Sun and discussing with …, the plant flowered here in our green house. I asked Dr. Stephan Gale (my colleague and author of Wild Orchids of Hong Kong) whats the difference and he said sinensis is glabrous and hongkongensis is hairy. So all these created some big doubts in my head as I knew very well that Indian ones are not glabrous at all. Lets hope to come to some conclusion soon. My preliminary doubts say that S. australis should be accepted name with hongkongensis as one of the synonyms, but Prof. Sun says they all are different.

---

Is it just the glabrous and hairy characters that differentiate these 2 species or some other characters as well?

---

“the broad, distinctly 3-lobed stigma as clear morphological characters that distinguish it from S. sinensis.”

---

…, can you please share the closeup you just shared here. Here is the one which we consider hongkongensis.

---

Here is one of the original drawings of Spiranthes australis.

---

These three plants are not well studied, hence it may not be a good way of distinguishing the three species.
Right now I have less

---

evidence to support this comment by the original author!!

---

A Spiranthes Sinensis from Kalatope… you’re right it is hairy… and as … asked… what are the other differences…

---

Thanks a lot … sir.
Yes this also looks like Spiranthes australis.

---

The reference I quoted considers S. sinensis and S.australis as synonyms whereas tries to compare S.sinensis, S.honkongensis and S.sunii.

---

In support of previous reply I am quoting http://www.theplantlist.org/tpl/record/kew-194521
S.sinensis is mentioned as synonym of S.australis.
May I know you reference considering it as two different species?

---

I am myself the reference. You can quote, … (pers. comm.).

---

I think the most appropriate answer is what I wrote in another thread:

In Flora of British India the species was described under the name Spiranthes australis (R. Br.) Lindl., A species name (rather combination) proposed in 1824, based on Neottia australis R. Br. (1810), a species supposed to have pubescent inflorescence spike (it is also supposed to have pubescent bracts and floral parts partly as I read from other sources).

Spiranthes sinensis (Pers.) Ames, is a name (rather combination) given in 1908, based on Neottia sinensis Pers. (1807), a species described from China and differing in glabrous spikes (and bracts and floral parts).

It has recently been considered by most authors (including Flora of China, Flora of Pakistan, etc.) that these two taxa are synonyms, and as basionym of latter is dated earlier, Spiranthes sinensis is accepted name.

It must be remembered that it is matter of taxonomic judgement (and not a simple issue of names), as the two species were originally described as distinct species (they have distinct types). For those who consider the differences are not enough would treat them under single species S. sinensis. Those who think (like original authors) that differences are sufficient, and are also trying to detect further differences to strengthen their distinct identity, would consider them as two separate species. I think … is just trying to do that, trying to settle the riddle, and he being a world renowned Orchid specialist is both qualified to do that. More so he owes the duty of resolving it for us.

---

What I feel that unless such claims are not published in any standard journal and discussed thoroughly, it may be of less relevance to common workers who believe in standard literature. Hoping that … will publish his claim very soon in any such journal so that it can be quoted as authentic reference.
I request him to present the pictures of all three Spiranthes he is mentioning as evidence so that we can believe in such claims, if he feels it ok.

---

You cant rely on a name just because it is published.

That ways, all botanical names given to a plant, once or multiple times should be valid.

Fact is you yourself have not seen the plant but claiming based on some references. And I am trying to say that those references have been wrongly written, which is very well possible as you can see a lot of times one plant has got multiple synonyms.

Its your perception whatever you wish to believe. Its my perception why I think they are same.

I told u in the first mail itself that the original plant which is Spiranthes sinensis is not hairy. This claim is well known and you may check the protologue. At the same time I have also shared the original icon of Spiranthes australis which is hairy.

Taxonomy is also a matter of your perception. Many such references quoted by you are wrong whether it belongs to flora of China or Kew checklist or Plant List. The main reason being, they studied the herbarium specimens and not the originals most of the times.
I still say in big words that ALL PLANTS TILL NOW KNOWN FROM INDIA ARE NOT S. sinensis because all are hairy. Prove me wrong if you can. Otherwise there is no point of discussion.

---

To add more:

… do you know there are around 440 names for the genus Spiranthes…

BUT ONLY 37 are accepted.

In other words does it mean that around 403 orchid experts made some mistake in identification.
No, its just that they had a different perception. Similarly you have yours and I have mine.

---

Orchids have a great medicinal value. I have experienced this. One of my friend and me also have used an ayurvedic formulation “Manipoushtic Churna” and results were wonderful in strengthening whole urinogenital system

---

---

VoF Week: Spiranthes sinensis from the way between Govindhghat and Ghangriya:

Spiranthes sinensis from the way between Govindhghat and Ghangriya

Shot Near Jangal Chatti

---

Wanted to know if this is Spiranrthes sinensis  ??

I think both synonym…

Yes I believe they r not synonyms. One is hairy and other is glabrous.
This mystery needs to be resolved.

Spiranthes australis from Valley of Flowers and Chakrata

Yes this should not be sinensis but australis. Lets see who resolves this.

ORCHIDACEAE FORTNIGHT:: Spiranthes for confirmation from VOF- NS 29 : Attachments (13). 4 posts by 3 authors.

This should be Spiranthes australis as it is hairy.

Wonderful pics.

This should be Spiranthes australis.

Orchidaceae Fortnight: Spiranthes sinensis from Manali GS-27  : Attachments (2). 2 posts by 2 authors.

Spiranthes sinensis photographed from Manali in October, 2009

Orchidaceae Fortnight:: Spiranthes sinensis | Chakrata : Attachments (1). 4 posts by 3 authors.

Spiranthes spiralis (L.) Chevall. : 11 posts by 3 authors. Attachments (6)

One of our recent studies has shown that Spiranthes sinensis can be both glabrous or hairy. Based on that your plant looks like Spiranthes sinensis. But you will be surprised that there is another undescribed species distributed along which is hairy and flower is white in colour but flowers are slightly bigger than this.

Are all our posts of spiralis in efi site are of sinensis now?

I will have to check one by one 🙁

Orchid for ID :: Auli, Uttarakhand :: Aug 2018 :: ARKOCT-32 : 6 posts by 5 authors. Attachments (3)
Saw this lone orchid on the sloping meadows of Auli near the top of the ropeway. It was nearly only 5-6 inches in length.
Please validate if it is Spiranthes sinensis, could not take pics of the leaves.

Spiranthes sinensis(Pers.)Ames  commonly known as the Chinese spiranthes, is a species of orchidoccurring in much of eastern Asia, west to the Himalayas, south and east to New Zealand, and north to Siberia

Spiranthes sinensis was believed to be non-hairy and then it is not the only species of the genus found in Himalaya. But then our study says it comes in both hairy and non-hairy forms for which I am shocked. Of course genetic studies have their own limitations.

Spiranthes sinensis correct ID : 7 posts by 4 authors. Attachments (1)- 4 mb.
I looked at the site and wondered if this is S. sinensis. I believe it is correct.

From where and when?

Somewhere in Nepal.

This is from Phulchowki Nepal. Growing in a south facing grassy area at 2300m. Photo taken 29 September 2020

It is hard to make out. Spiranthes sinensis comes in both hairy and non hairy forms. Then this is not really the flowering time of S. sinensis. But so far only S. sinensis is known from Nepal.
So I will consider it S. sinensis unless someone dissects the flower and shows the inner parts.