THE VASCULAR EPIPHYTE FLORA OF EL TRIUNFO BIOSPHERE RESERVE, CHIAPAS, ME ´ XICO NAYELY MARTI ´ NEZ-MELE ´ NDEZ1 1 ,MIGUEL A ´ NGEL PE ´ REZ-FARRERA, AND RUBEN MARTI ´ NEZ-CAMILO Herbario Eizi Matuda, Escuela de Biologı ´a, Universidad de Ciencias y Artes de Chiapas, Libramiento norte poniente, Col. Lajas Maciel, Tuxtla Gutie ´rrez, Chiapas, Me ´xico 29039 1 e-mail: nayeluci@yahoo.com.mx ABSTRACT. An analysis of the vascular epiphytes of El Triunfo Biosphere Reserve was made based on eight years of field work and herbarium data. Four hundred and sixty five species and infraspecies of vascular epiphytes from 131 genera and 31 families are listed. Approximately 9% were found to be true epiphytes, whereas 0.65% were accidental epiphytes. Orchidaceae was the most species-rich family, although the genera Peperomia, Tillandsia, and Polypodium were the most rich in epiphytes. Key Words: epiphytes, Reserve, Triunfo, Chiapas Floristic studies carried out in Mexico have generally been focused on the structure and composition of the vegetation of the different plant communities (Alca ´ ntara and Luna 2001; Martı ´nez and Galindo-Leal 2002; Martı ´nez-Cruz and Tellez-Valdes 2004; Mejia-Domı ´nguez et al. 2004; Pe ´rez-Garcı ´a et al. 2001; Salas- Morales et al. 2003; Sa ´ nchez-Rodrı ´guez et al. 2003). Little attention has been given to the epiphytes that many of these communities include, even though these constitute nearly 10% of the world diversity of vascular flora (Kress 1986). This is due in part to difficulty accessing ephiphytic communities (Mitchell et al. 2002; Moffett 1993) and in part to taxonomic and nomenclatural problems that some families present, for example the Orchidaceae. The study and knowledge of Mexican epiphytes is even less developed. Some of the work that has been carried out in Mexico has focused on: (1) the effects of forest fragmentation, anthropo- genic disturbance, and habitat transformation (Cruz-Ango ´n and Greenberg 2005; Hietz 2005; Hietz-Seifert et al. 1996; Solis- Montero et al. 2005; Wolf 2005); (2) community structure, diversity, and ecology (Castan ˜ o-Meneses et al. 2003; Hietz and Hietz-Seifert 1995a, 1995b; Winkler et al. 2005); (3) host preferences (Bernal et al. 2005; Mehltreter et al. 2005; Wolf and Flamenco 2003; Rhodora rhod-111-948-03.3d 9/12/09 14:29:01 504 Cust # 08-20 RHODORA, Vol. 111, No. 948, pp. 504–536, 2009 E Copyright 2009 by the New England Botanical Club 504