Angraecum flavidum

Names and Taxonomy

The accepted scientific name is Angraecum flavidum Bosser, first published in Adansonia n.s., 10: 100 (1970)【1†L1-L4】. The name is listed as accepted by Kew’s Plants of the World Online【1†L1-L4】 and by the World Flora Online database【3†L1-L4】. A later homotypic synonym is Boryangraecum flavidum (Bosser) Szlach., Mytnik & Grochocka, published in 2013【1†L8-L10】【4†L1-L4】. No other synonyms or infraspecific taxa are recorded.

How to Identify This Species

Published sources consulted do not provide descriptive morphology, measurements of vegetative or floral parts, or photographs for Angraecum flavidum. Consequently, diagnostic characters such as leaf shape, stem length, flower colour, lip structure, or spur length are not documented in the available references.

Native Range and Habitat

The species is native to the island of Madagascar, specifically reported from the northern part of the island【1†L1-L3】. It is described as an epiphytic subshrub occurring in wet tropical forest biomes【1†L1-L3】. Detailed information on elevation range, preferred host trees, or micro‑habitat preferences is not available in the cited material.

Species-Specific Care

Scroll to explore the table →

To date, no horticultural publications or grower reports specifically address the cultivation of Angraecum flavidum. Growers interested in attempting cultivation should start from general Angraecum guidelines (e.g., warm to intermediate temperatures, bright but filtered light, high humidity) and adjust based on plant response, while recognizing that these are extrapolations rather than species‑specific data.

Flowering and Pollination

Information on flowering period, flower longevity, fragrance, nectar spur length, or pollinator observations for Angraecum flavidum is not present in the consulted literature.

Evidence and Limitations

The taxonomic status and native distribution are well supported by Kew’s Plants of the World Online, the CITES Orchid Checklist, and World Flora Online. However, detailed morphological descriptions, ecological preferences, phenology, and cultivation recommendations are absent from the available online sources. Further field studies or specialist monographs would be needed to fill these gaps.