ALBERT

Description: In 1938, Verdam published an account of the then-known Charophyta of the Netherlands in the English language (cf. this journal, vol. 3), and one year later (1939) another in our own language in \xe2\x80\x9cNederlandsch Kruidkundig Archief\xe2\x80\x9d. In both papers reference was made to only five Netherlands\xe2\x80\x99 publications on the same subject, the oldest of which is dating from 1846. In studying i.a. the history of the Malaysian Charophyta (Zaneveld, 1940) I found that much more was published on the Charophyta of our Low Countries. As will be seen below, it became evident that the first printed record of a Netherlands\xe2\x80\x99 Charophyte dates as far back as 1636. It seems worth while to publish these notes on the history of the identification of our Charophyta as, moreover, a number of additional facts have become known.\nThe data of the present review have been taken from the following sources (chronologically arranged): 1. herbals ; 2. catalogues of Botanic Gardens; 3. local floras; 4. general floras and taxonomic textbooks; 5. monographs.

Description: The Talaud Islands are forming part of the Malay Archipelago, being situated north of Celebes and the Moluccas, south of Mindanao and east of the Sangihe group, between 3\xc2\xb045\xe2\x80\x99 and 5\xc2\xb035\xe2\x80\x99 N. lat. and 126\xc2\xb032\xe2\x80\x99 and 127\xc2\xb010\xe2\x80\x99 E. long.\nThe main group consists of three larger islands, viz. Karakelong, Salebaboe and Kaboeroeang. The Nenoesa islands, a group formed by the small islands of Garete, Karaton, Merampi, Mengkopoe, Intata, Kakelotan and Maroh are situated northeast of the main group, including also Miangas (Palmas), an islet about 65 miles north of Karakelong, near Mindanao.

Description: This publication is a continuation of \xe2\x80\x9ePlantenkaartjes voor Nederland\xe2\x80\x9d, published by Dr. J. W. C. GOETHART and Dr. W. J. JONG MANS in the years 1902\xe2\x80\x941908. For both publications the same methods, differing in two respects from those usually adopted elsewhere, have been employed.\nAs in the first place it is utterly impossible to show on a very small-scale map, the exact spot where a certain species of plant is to be found, this mock-accuracy has been avoided. Only that part of the topographical map is indicated, which contains the finding-place. With this end in view, each of the 64 sheets of the survey-map of the Netherlands is covered by a net of 48 rectangles, each side being approximately one hour\xe2\x80\x99s walk long (exactly 4180 X 5000 metres). These rectangles are called \xe2\x80\x9ehour-squares\xe2\x80\x9d, each being subdivided into 16 \xe2\x80\x9equarter-hoursquares\xe2\x80\x9d of 1045 X 1250 metres. The \xe2\x80\x9ehour-square\xe2\x80\x9d, in which any special finding-place of a plant occurs, is clearly shown on a photo-lithographically reduced map with the \xe2\x80\x9ehour-square\xe2\x80\x9d division. As the scale of the reduced map is left large enough, even the \xe2\x80\x9equarter-hour-square\xe2\x80\x9d in question can be clearly distinguished within its \xe2\x80\x9ehour-square\xe2\x80\x9d.

Description: Several years ago the Director of the Bernice P. Bishop Museum, Honolulu, was kind enough to lend me the Sapotaceous material from the Pacific region preserved in its Herbarium. It has been enumerated underneath together with additional material from other herbaria. These have been quoted by means of the following abbreviations, which are taken from Lanjouw\xe2\x80\x99s list, published in Chronica Botanica V, 1932, 142. A. = Arnold Arboretum of Harvard University, Jamaica Plain (Mass.), U.S.A. B. = Botanisches Museum, Berlin-Dahlem. Bish. = Bernice P. Bish. Museum, Honolulu, Hawaiian Isl. and some specimens from the private herbarium of Mr O. Degener. Bz. = Herbarium, Gov. Botanic Gardens, Buitenzorg, Java. Cal. = California Botanical Gardens, San Francisco. G. = Institut de Botanique syst\xc3\xa9matique de l\xe2\x80\x99Universit\xc3\xa9 de Gen\xc3\xa8ve. GB. = Botanical Garden, G\xc3\xb6teborg. GH. = Gray Herbarium of Harvard University, Cambridge (Mass.), U.S.A. K. = Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. L. = Rijksherbarium, Leiden. NY. = New York Botanical Garden, New York. O. = Universitetets Botaniske Museum, Oslo. P. = Mus\xc3\xa9um National d\xe2\x80\x99Histoire Naturelle, Lab. de Phan\xc3\xa9rogamie, Paris. PRC. = Botanical Institute, Charles University, Praha.\nBesides, a number of the specimens quoted are probably represented in other, particularly American herbaria, of which no data were available. I wish to tender my sincere thanks to the directors of the institutions mentioned for their kind assistance.

Description: Culmi robusti, foliati. Folia lata, linearia, trinervia. Inflorescentia corymboso-paniculata, multispiculata. Spiculae (\xe2\x80\x9dspicae\xe2\x80\x9d multorum auctorum) parvae, multiflorae. Flores hermaphroditi (\xe2\x80\x9dspiculae androgynae\xe2\x80\x9d auctorum) perianthio utriculiformi, compresso, vix carinato, staminibus (\xe2\x80\x9dfloribus masculinis monandris\xe2\x80\x9d auctorum) tribus, binis lateralibus tertio anteriore, ovario (\xe2\x80\x9dflore foemineo terminali nudo\xe2\x80\x9d auctorum) rostrato, basi angustato, haud stipitato, styli ramis ternis. Nux tri-costata, rugulosa.\nGeneri Hypolytro L. C. Rich. proxima, a quo differt styli ramis tribus et nuce tri-costata. A Thoracostachyo et Paramapania, quibuscum stigmatum numero convenit, et structura florum et perianthio connato et nucis forma longe diversa, faciliter dignoscenda. Mapaniae potius affinis, sed ab omnibus speciebus huius generis inflorescentia a plerisque etiam perianthio connato discrepat.

Description: Genera Mapania, Hypolytrum, Thoracostachyum valde cognata sunt. Quamvis enim adhuc diversa sit botanicorum sententia de structura florum huius tribus morphologice interpretanda, de hac re omnes consentiunt, squamellas laterales binas generis Hypolytri, sive sepala sive glumas floriferas vocandas, squamellis exterioribus Mapaniae et Thoracostachyi homologas esse. F. Pax solum, qui cum nonnullis aliis auctoribus Thoracostachyum cum Mapania iungendo systema Benthamianum et Hookerianum secutus est, tertium genus, cui solo flores bisexuales ascribit, longe disiunxit. Conspectus generum usitatus ut in Hook. f., Fl. Brit. Ind. VI, p. 586, ubi C. B. Clarke Cyperaceas disposuit, ita fert: A. Spicula capitata .............................. Mapania B. Spicula corymboso-paniculata. 1. Stylus bifidus ...................... Hypolytrum. 2. Stylus trifidus ................. Thoracostachyum.\nHic conspectus autem numero specierum cognitarum sensim augente quibusdam vitiis laborare apparet. Corymbos a capitibus diiudicare non semper facile. Discrimen a numero styli ramorum sumptum incertum, quia in eodem genere sicut in Scirpo et in Carice, quin etiam in eadem specie, saepe mutari cernitur. Praeterea speciebus spicula singula praeditis nullum genus hospitium praebere videtur.

Description: Though an excellent, critical monograph of the genus Cassipourea was published some years ago by ALSTON (in Kew Bulletin, 1925, p. 241\xe2\x80\x94276), I should like to make a few remarks on the South-American species of this genus as my revision for PULLE\xe2\x80\x99s Flora of Suriname III.2 has brought to light a few new facts. It will also give me an opportunity to refer to a publication of BRIQUET on some American representatives of this genus (in Candollea IV, 1931, p. 342\xe2\x80\x94350), which disagrees with regard to a number of species with ALSTON\xe2\x80\x99s interpretations.\nThe species which covers the largest area is the chiefly West-Indian C. elliptica (Sw.) Poir. Formerly also a number of West- Brazilian and Peruvian specimens were referred to it, but ALSTON pointed out that these plants belonged to another species for which he introduced the name C. peruviana. A new West-Indian species, based on Broadway nr. 3841 and 4631, both from Tobago, was described by BRIQUET under the name C. Broadwayi. This species is, in my opinion, conspecific with C. elliptica. BRIQUET amply discussed the differences with C. latifolia Alston from Trinidad, but does not mention its relationship to C. elliptica. , though, in view of the latter\xe2\x80\x99s area of distribution, this would have been more to the point. That ALSTON had already referred Broadway nr. 3841 to C. elliptica was apparently overlooked by BRIQUET. In opposition to BRIQUET I agree with ALSTON that no value should be set on the varieties of C. elliptica described by GRISEBACH (Fl. Br. W. Ind. Isl., I860, p. 274).

Description: The region, from which the Vernonieae and the Eupatorieae have been worked out, includes the Greater Sunda Islands, the Lesser Sunda Islands and the Moluccas. It is a well-known fact, that the Malay Peninsula and the Philippines have a flora, which is related to that of the Malay Archipelago, sensu stricto, belonging to the same region indeed. The Compositae of these parts have, however, been recently dealt with by RIDLEY (Fl. Mal. Pen. II, 1923, 177) and by MERRILL (Enum. Phil. Flow. Pl. III, 1923, 591) respectively, whereas those from New Guinea, which is floristically less related to the Malay Archipelago, have been worked out by MATTFELD (Engl. Bot. Jahrb. LXII, 1929, 386).\nThe material, used for this paper, chiefly belongs to the National Herbarium (Rijksherbarium), Leiden (L), the Herbarium of the Botanical Gardens, Buitenzorg (B) and the University Herbarium, Utrecht (U); for the rest it is to be found in the Herbarium of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew (K) and the Herbarium of the British Museum, London (Br. M.); some specimens of the Herbarium of the Linnean Society of London and of the Herbarium of the \xe2\x80\x9eConservatoire botanique de la ville de Gen\xc3\xa8ve\xe2\x80\x9d (G) have also been studied, whereas the type specimen of Vernonia arborea was discovered in the Herbarium of the Royal Botanic Garden, Edinburgh. I feel greatly indebted to the Directors of these herbaria for their kindness in putting these materials at my disposal.

Description: The Ericaceous genus Rigiolepis was founded by Sir JOSEPH D. HOOKER (Ic. plant, third ser. II (1876), 54, pl. 1160) on a single species from Borneo, viz. R. borneensis HOOK.F. HOOKER was not quite sure about some of the characteristics, and failed to compare it with Vaccinium to which genus, indeed, several authors have reduced it.\nIn 1914 I have discussed the Rigiolepis question (in Ic. Bog. IV, 68) in the note under Vaccinium uniflorum J. J. S. and was inclined to believe that Rigiolepis should be maintained as a distinct genus, although my material was not sufficient to solve the question definitely. Since I have studied many other species of this affinity and I do not hesitate to accept the genus.