An epiphytic herb growing to 50 cm. in height.  Roots: No description given.  Stems:  No description given.  Leaves: oblong with acute tips.  Inflorescence: the plants are generally unifloral and will produce only one fully-developed flower on a 50 cm peduncle, but in the rare event that the plant manages to produce more than one flower bud, the more basal bud will generally spontaneously abort.  Flowers: flowers are purple with white and dark-purple spots; dorsal sepal is elliptic-lanceolate, acuminate; lateral sepals are obliquely lanceolate, acuminate; and petals are obliquely lanceolate-elliptic, acuminate.  The lip base is truncate and sub-sagittate in outline with a rounded apex.  The disc of the lip has five parallel keels, two of which are covered completely by the adpressed column while the other three extend past the column.  The central keel is the longest and it almost reaches the apex of the lip.   The column is oblong-oblanceolate in shape with two conspicuous notches or teeth at the apex. 

Known only from the type specimen collected on Mt. Sacranix near the city of Coban in the Department of Alta Verapaz, Guatemala.

Since this taxon is known only from the type specimen there is insufficient data to determine rarity or populations. 

The description indicates that it was collected in primary forest on an oak tree at 1,600 meters above sea level.  At the stated locality this would be the transition between humid broadleaf forest and cloud forest.   This taxon seems to have a predilection for very humid, wet forests. 

See above.

According to the authors of this species, Archila and Chiron, the plant can be distinguished from the closely related Barkeria spectabilis  by the more purplish coloration and the greater size of its flowers; the shape of the lip (sub-sagittate vs. ovate to oblong); and the five keels on the lip versus just three in B. spectabilis.

However, in our opinion, this taxon is just an aberrant form of B. spectabilis.  Accordingly, it should be reduced in rank and subsumed as a heterotypic synonym of the latter.  The differences in coloration and size of the flowers are subjective features that do not merit consideration as defining characteristics for the establishment of a new species, particularly when no mention is made in the description of the general floral characteristics of the entire population at the locality and a single plant is seemingly being put forth as a type specimen.  Furthermore, the “difference” in lip shape is a meaningless feature since the outline of flower lips in B. spectabilis populations is extremely variable in both shape and color to begin with.  The only feature of B. archilarum that would be considered a novelty when compared to B. spectabilis would be the number of keels on the lip.  Unfortunately, the botanical drawing provided in the description does not provide sufficient detail of this taxonomic feature to allow scientific interpretation, while the photograph of the flower only shows the three longest keels that extend out from underneath the column.  Even if this floral characteristic was heritable, stable and widespread in the local population, which cannot be assumed from the scant and deficient information provided in the description, it would not be enough, in our estimation, to warrant describing this population of Guatemalan plants (or is it just a singular plant?) as a new species.  We propose renaming the plants referent to this taxon as B. spectabilis var. quinquecarinae, in the event that further investigations reveal that all of the Barkeria plants at the locality do, in fact, share this trait, but at this time we do not think that this taxon deserves the rank of species.

The type specimen was collected in May at the type locality, so its bloom time is probably similar to that of B. spectabilis.  

N/A

To our knowledge, this taxon has never been used in any registered crosses.