For them to be D amadbilis should we not be able to see the toothed labellum side lobes. I notice the petals are also narrow and the dorsal sepal is small. The number of leave would have been useful.
I agree Derek, it doesn't really look right for amabilis. Given that the notes imply it's growing with golden moths and the fact that it's so abundant, it could just be larger individuals of chryseopsis. Or do you have a better idea?
Except that the petals are a little oblique rather than tucked more under the labellum they are quit like subalpina with the colour in the throat and the small dorsal sepal. I have lots of photos of subalpina and there can be variation. I am happy to share if that would help. I am just guessing though. It is easier to say what it is not and that maybe how I have arrived at my suspicion.
I considered subalpina, but wondered about the location which doesn't appear to be particularly high, and the fact that the notes implied it was growing among chryseopsis. D chryseopsis was flowering nearby in September which would have been too early for it to be monticola and therefore implies a lower altitude. Without a picture of the leaves I think we can only call it Diuris sp.
I think the labellum side lobes here are toothed aren't they? Doesn't look like subalpina to me, which is quite a small flower anyway. Looks ok for amabilis to me, and given the flowering time, although they are very similar to chryseopsis
Describe how you intend to use these images and/or audio files and your request will be sent to the author for consideration.
Your request has been successfully submitted to the author for consideration.
1,893,031 sightings of 21,044 species in 9,272 locations from 12,889 contributors CCA 3.0 | privacy
We acknowledge the Traditional Owners of this land and acknowledge their continuing connection to their culture. We pay our respects to their Elders past and present.