Of the 134 new bromeliad taxa Harry Luther described, or helped describe, slightly over half (70) were first published in the Journal of the Bromeliad Society. The remaining species were described in various other journals, and not all of them have ever received an appropriate treatment in this Journal. Orthophytum sucrei (Fig. 1) is one such case. The species was originally described in Selbyana (Luther 1997). Being prolific, it was widespread in cultivation soon after its introduction.

The line drawing accompanying the original description of the species (Fig. 2), although considerably stylized, clearly represents the species we grow as Orthophytum sucrei. The formal description of the species also matches the cultivated plants well--although in the line drawing the terminal inflorescence seems disproportionately large compared to the basal rosette and the reference to red floral bracts is at odds with the orange-red color seen on living plants. However, this description only covers the appearance of the plant in the earliest phase of its potential life cycle.

In cultivation, Orthophytum sucrei is one of the most distinctive members of the O. disjunctum subcomplex as defined by Elton Leme (Leme 2004). I only have a single clone of this species; the plant distributed by Marie Selby Botanical Gardens with accession number SEL 83-44. I have no idea what degree of variation may be seen in and between natural populations, so please don't assume any distinctive characters I mention will necessarily be found in the natural habitat. With this disclaimer out of the way, O. sucrei is distinguished by the very thin and flexible leaves of the basal rosette; the initially erect inflorescence (above-ground stem, see Fig. 1) and the orange-red, foliaceous floral bracts on the terminal, simple flower-bearing spike. Few flowers are produced by the inflorescence and there is a very quick transition from flowering to a new stem with a new basal rosette at the tip of the infloresence. The transition is marked by the change in color from the orange-red of floral bracts to the green of the offset's leaves. Otherwise there is no apparent difference between the floral bracts and the new leaves (see Figs. 4-6).

There has been total confusion in the literature concerning the application of the terms stem and inflorescence to these plants, so I will take some time here to explain how I use them. First, there is a clear difference between the longevity of the stem and inflorescence in virtually all members of Orthophytum subcomplex disjunctum,--with the glaring exception of O. sucrei. The true stem is relatively long-lived, is usually found underground. It produced roots, has short internodes, produces leaves with distinguishable sheaths, and, if it produces offsets, these offsets arise from buds in the axils of the leaves. What often appears to be a 'stem' growing above ground is actually part of the inflorescence. It is relatively short-lived (it shrivels and dies while the true stem is still intact), never produces roots, produces bracts that look very much like leaves--but have no discernible sheath--and...