CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · Science & Nature

Epidendrum conopseum

species of plant

Specimen drawers, botanical folios and brass scientific instruments under study light
Science and natureInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionJul 23, 2025
Entity authorityQ21162616 ↗
Source-derived summary

Epidendrum conopseum, synonym Epidendrum magnoliae, sometimes called the green-fly orchid, is a species of orchid in the genus Epidendrum.

Description

It has robust roots that cling to tree bark and short, often pendulous cane-shaped stems wrapped in tubular leaf sheaths. Each stem carries two or three leathery, elliptical leaves with acute or subacute tips. Leaves are broadly elliptical, up to 10 cm (3.9 in) long, thick and almost leathery. Flowering typically occurs from late autumn to spring, producing a terminal, racemose, erect, loose inflorescence about 16 cm long with a few flowers. One plant will produce 6-14 flowers that are a bit over 2 cm in diameter, pale green to bronze-colored. Sepals and petals are oblanceolate, the lip is three lobed at the apex.

The diploid chromosome number of E. conopseum has been determined as 2n = 40, the haploid chromosome number as n = 20.

Distribution

It is the most northern-growing epiphytic orchid in North America, being found wild in the southeastern United States in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina and South Carolina and also in northeastern Mexico (Nuevo León, San Luis Potosí, Tamaulipas). Epidendrum conopseum grows on the branches of evergreen and deciduous trees such as Magnolia grandiflora, Quercus virginiana, Taxodium distichum, Swamp Black Gum, or American beech, at low elevations less than 100 m (330 ft) above sea level.

Editorial summary

The public source identifies “Epidendrum conopseum” as species of plant. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Epidendrum, conopseum and species.

Editorial reviewA practical orientation to terminology and classification, particularly when read beside dated observations, specimens or technical literature. The current 224-word lead offers orientation but no explicit four-digit date, so chronology should not be assumed. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its value is orientation rather than verdict, with Epidendrum, conopseum and species providing the first useful test.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Epidendrum conopseum”, the useful work is to connect “species of plant” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.

Evidence profile

The date and method of observation matter as much as the stated conclusion, especially where classification or consensus has changed. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jul 23, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q21162616. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference.

Critical limits

A general summary may omit uncertainty, sample limits or methodological disagreement that is explicit in the technical record. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Check terminology, classification and the date of the cited evidence. Scientific names and technical consensus can change while older records retain historical value.

Best used for
  • Current terminology
  • Classification context
  • Finding cited technical literature
Verify next

Primary datasets, specimen catalogues, standards bodies and the most recent peer-reviewed literature.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Epidendrum conopseum”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Epidendrum conopseum primary sources, Epidendrum conopseum archive and Epidendrum research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Epidendrum conopseum”?
  2. Which observation, specimen, dataset or publication supports the account?
  3. Has classification or technical consensus changed since the cited source?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Epidendrum conopseum” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.