Seeds solitary, oblong.
SPECIFIC CHARACTER.
Heliconia. Foliis glaberrimis, lanceolatis; inflorescentia glaberrima; spadice terminali flexuoso; spathis multifloris, marginibus revolutis; nectario lanceolato, concavo, integro.
Heliconia with very smooth, lance-shaped leaves; the inflorescence quite smooth; stem terminating in a zig-zag form; sheaths containing many flowers and rolled back; honey-cup lance-shaped, concave, and entire.
REFERENCE TO THE PLATE.
1. The Blossom, with the three petals detached from the upper part of the Honey-cup, which is
shewn in front with the smaller leaf inclosed within the larger.
2. The Chives, with the lower part of the Honey-cup, to shew their insertion at its base, and
the smaller leaf of the Honey-cup in its place.
3. The smaller leaf of the Honey-cup, magnified.
4. The Shaft and Summit, the Summit detached magnified.
5. The Seed-bud, natural size.
6. The Seed-bud cut transversely, magnified.
The Parrot-billed Heliconia, a native of the continent of South America, as well as most of the West India Islands, was first received, in plants, from the island of St. Vincents, in the year 1797, by Thomas Evans, Esq. of Stepney; in whose collection it first flowered, in September 1798, when our drawing was taken. This plant requires a considerable degree of moisture and heat, as well as much root room and rich earth, to make it flower in perfection; as it seldom opens its blossoms freely without such treatment, and even with such assistance, they are to be seen but for a few hours in that state. It propagates from the roots, throwing up a number of suckers from the joints, which are formed at a considerable distance from the plant. The younger Linnæus in his Sup. Plant. of 1781, p. 158, has described this plant under our specific title, but different in some few points; which appear to arise more from his ideas of the various parts, than from any real difference in the plant itself. Swartz in his Obs. 98, gives sheaths to his plant, which Linnæus, we presume, denominates flower stem leaves, &c. yet we have no doubt, but they have both described the same plant; and perfectly agree with Willdenow and Martyn, that the H. psittacorum of both authors is the same, and have as little of this being the plant.[Pg 503]
PLATE 124
