Phloeophila ursula (Luer & Hirtz) Luer (2006: 194)

Chiron, Guy R., Karremans, Adam P. & Berg, Cassio Van Den, 2016, Nomenclatural notes in the Pleurothallidinae (Orchidaceae): Phloeophila, Phytotaxa 270 (1), pp. 56-62 : 60

Phloeophila ursula (Luer & Hirtz) Luer (2006: 194)

Basionym: Pleurothallis ursula Luer & Hirtz (1996: 193) .

Excluded taxa:

Phloeophila oricola (H.Stenzel) Luer (2006: 193) = Acianthera oricola (H.Stenzel) Karremans, Chiron & van den Berg , comb. nov.

Basionym: Pleurothallis oricola Stenzel (2002: 101) .

Pleurothallis oricola was placed in Phloeophila in Luer’s monograph of that genus. Nevertheless, the free dorsal sepal, narrowly obovate petals and prominently trilobed lip and verrucose-papillose above the middle are more similar to some species of Acianthera from the Antilles than to Phloeophila . Stenzel (2007) suspected such a relationship too.

Phloeophila similis (Schltr.) Garay (1974: 118) = Acianthera similis (Schltr.) Karremans, Chiron & van den Berg , comb. nov.

Basionym: Cryptophoranthus similis Schlechter (1919: 323) .

Cryptophoranthus similis was placed by Luer in Pleurothallis sect. Phloeophilae Luer (1986: 17) together with other species that would later be recognized as belonging to genus Phloeophila . Nevertheless, Schlechter (1919) clearly described the sepals as “apice cohaerentibus” and the lip as “brevissime auriculato”, both features of species belonging to Acianthera sect. Cryptophoranthae (Luer) Chiron & van den Berg (2012: 68) rather than Phloeophila . Luer (2006) in fact excluded P. similis from his monograph of Phloeophila .

Phloeophila yupanki (Luer & R.Vásquez) Pridgeon & Chase (2001: 254) = Dryadella yupanki (Luer & R.Vásquez) Karremans , comb. nov.

Basionym: Pleurothallis yupanki Luer & Vásquez in Luer (1984: 203).

Pleurothallis yupanki , as the previous, was also member of Pleurothallis sect. Phloeophilae and was therefore transferred to Phloeophila by Pridgeon and Chase (2001). It was later segregated into the monotypic genus Incaea Luer (2006: 87) due to its aberrant morphology. Nevertheless, DNA results (Karremans et al., in press) place it embedded within Dryadella Luer (1978: 207) , which it resembles morphologically.