The pollination process in Trigonidium obtusum Lindl. (Epidendroideae: Maxillariinae) is documented. The flowers are pollinated by sexually excited drones of Plebeia droryana (Meliponinae). When attempting to copulate either with sepals or petals, these bees slip on the waxy perianth surface and become trapped in the funnel‐like flower tube. Bees trying to escape from the flowers may instead access the space between the column and lip, fixing the pollinarium on their scutellum. Pollinarium‐bearing bees may pollinate the flowers when repeating the above‐mentioned steps, leaving pollinia on the concave stigmatic surface, thus effecting pollination. Recently removed pollinaria are too broad to enter the stigma but they begin to dehydrate and within 40 min of removal are small enough to fit the stigmatic cavity. This mechanism prevents insect‐mediated self‐pollination and promotes cross‐pollination. Preliminary evidence based on experiments with cultivated plants suggests that they are self‐compatible but that fruit set is pollinator‐dependent. The data obtained are discussed in a phylogenetic context. It is suggested that the pseudocopulatory syndrome in Trigonidium could have evolved from rewardless (food advertising) ancestors. Pseudocopulation in the context of the long flowering period of this orchid species (about 7 months) is understandable since the eusocial Plebeia bees produce fertile individuals several times a year.

• Background and Aims Pollination through sexual mimicry, also known as pseudocopulation, has been suggested to occur in some genera of the Neotropical orchid subtribe Maxillariinae. However, it has been demonstrated so far only for Trigonidium obtusum. This study reports and illustrates pollination through sexual mimicry in Mormolyca ringens. • Methods A total of 70 h were dedicated to the observation of flowers and pollinator behaviour, which was photographically recorded. Flower features involved in pollinator attraction were studied using a stereomicroscope and by SEM analyses. Preliminary observations on the plant breeding system were made by manually self‐pollinating flowers. The chemical composition of the fragrance volatiles was determined by GC/MS analysis. • Key Results The flower features of M. ringens parallel those of other pseudocopulatory flowers. The labellum shape and indument are reminiscent of an insect. Sexually excited drones of Nannotrigona testaceicornis and Scaptotrigona sp. (both in the Apidae: Meliponini) attempt copulation with the labellum and pollinate the flower in the process. In both bee species, the pollinarium is attached to the scutellum. Pollinator behaviour may promote some degree of self‐pollination, but preliminary observations indicate that M. ringens flowers are self‐incompatible. Flowers are produced all the year round, which ties in with the production of bee males several times a year. The phylogenetic relationships of M. ringens are discussed and a number of morphological and phenological features supporting them are reported. • Conclusions It is expected that further research could bring to light whether other Maxillariinae species are also pollinated through sexual mimicry. When a definitive and robust phylogeny of this subtribe is available, it should be possible to determine how many times pseudocopulation evolved and its possible evolutionary history.

The orchid genus Maxillaria is one of the largest and most common of neotropical orchid genera, but its current generic boundaries and relationships have long been regarded as artificial. Phylogenetic relationships within subtribe Maxillariinae sensu with emphasis on Maxillaria s.l. were inferred using parsimony analyses of individual and combined DNA sequence data. We analyzed a combined matrix of nrITS DNA, the plastid matK gene and flanking trnK intron, and the plastid atpB‐rbcL intergenic spacer for 619 individuals representing ca. 354 species. The plastid rpoC1 gene (ca. 2600 bp) was sequenced for 84 selected species and combined in a more limited analysis with the other data sets to provide greater resolution. In a well‐resolved, supported consensus, most clades were present in more than one individual analysis. All the currently recognized minor genera of “core” Maxillariinae (Anthosiphon, Chrysocycnis, Cryptocentrum, Cyrtidiorchis, Mormolyca, Pityphyllum, and Trigonidium) are embedded within a polyphyletic Maxillaria s.l. Our results support the recognition of a more restricted Maxillaria, of some previously published segregate genera (Brasiliorchis, Camaridium, Christensonella, Heterotaxis, Ornithidium, Sauvetrea), and of several novel clades at the generic level. These revised monophyletic generic concepts should minimize further nomenclatural changes, encourage monographic studies, and facilitate more focused analyses of character evolution within Maxillariinae.