ALBERT

Description: Various stages of tropical weathering are described using a number of examples of red soil formation derived from rift basalts in Burundi and laterite bauxites from plateau basalts of South Vietnam. The phenomena of decomposition of primary minerals are comparable in the two regions. Fine-grained montmorillonites, kaolinites, halloysites and hematite were formed during an initial stage of weathering. The two generations of kaolinites, goethites and gibbsites are the main products of a more intense stage of weathering. The gradients of chemical activities in the micro-environment (surfaces of grains, pores, microfissures) seem to be the controlling factors of weathering.

Description: Im letzten Viertel des 19. Jahrhunderts ·entstanden auf dem Potsdamer Telegrafenberg ein astrophysikalisches und ein meteorologisch-geomagnetisches Observatorium sowie ein geodätisches Institut.Die Bedeutung dieser schon bald nach ihrer Gründung weltbekannten Einrichtungen für die deutsche und internationale Polarforschung wird anhand von ausgewählten Beispielen verdeutlicht.

Description: There comes a time in the history of nearly every genus when it becomes almost immoral to add new species without first having surveyed the genus as a whole. Dendrophthora has reached this state. From the time of its first recognition as a separate entity to the present, new species have been described, often on very tenuous grounds, and usually without an indication of infrageneric relationships, until today we are faced with a staggering mass of specific epithets in complete chaos. The genus has not been comprehensively studied for more than half a century, and no balanced attempt has as yet been made to establish natural divisions within. Having become interested in the morphology of this and the related genus Phoradendron (KUIJT, 1959), I was naturally led on to some taxonomic considerations. My stay in Europe in 1958-1959 enabled me to visit the major European herbaria, and the notes and sketches accumulated there soon pointed the way to the present work.

Description: 1. The chromosome numbers of 10 species of the genus Viola in the Netherlands were determined. 2. Viola riviniana has various chromosome numbers: 2n = 35, 40, 45, 46, 47 (most often 2n = 40). 3. It was not possible to find a correlation between the external morphology and the various chromosome numbers in V. riviniana. 4. Despite the variability of V. riviniana it proved impossible to divide the Dutch material into subspecies. 5. Some differential characters of V. riviniana and V. reichenbachiana are described. 6. V. canina is not variable in cytological respect in the Netherlands. 7. V. calaminaria is not related to V. lutea but to the V. tricolor complex.

Description: The genus Praravinia was created by KORTHALS (in TEMMINCK, Verhand. Nat. Gesch. Ned. Overz. Bezitt., Bot., p. 189, tab. 41, 1839-1842) for a plant which he had collected in the south-eastern part of Borneo. He described it as similar in habit and doubtless nearly related to Urophyllum WALL. His diagnosis of the genus, however, does not substantiate this point of view, for it contains two statements which seem to exclude the possibility of a near affinity: the aestivation of the corolla lobes is described as imbricate, whereas in Urophyllum and its allies it is always valvate, and the number of corolla lobes is said to be half as large as that of the stamens, a condition unknown not only in Urophyllum but in the whole family. As in the description of the species the aestivation is correctly set down as valvate, the first statement need not trouble us: the word “imbricate” in the generic diagnosis is obviously a slip of the pen. The other statement, however, is repeated in the description of the species, but it strikes one as anomalous that immediately afterwards the 8—12 stamens are said to alternate with the corolla lobes, as this of course would be impossible when the latter were but half as numerous as the first. The discrepancy between the number of the corolla lobes and of the stamens led MIQUEL in his “Flora Indiae Batavae II, p. 225 (1857)” to consider Praravinia as a quite singular genus, rather out of place in the family Rubiaceae: it reminded him, he says, of the Samydeae (Flacourtiaceae). When he wrote this, he knew the genus merely from the description given by KORTHALS, but afterwards he found an opportunity to study the latter’s material. In his “De quibusdam Rubiaceis, Apocyneis et Asclepiadeis” (Ann. Mus. Bot. Lugd.-Bat. IV, p. 136, 1869) he proposes, as a result of this investigation, to exclude the genus from the Rubiaceae, and to raise it to family rank. The new family, for which he introduces the name Metrocladeaceae, should be regarded, however, as nearly related to the Rubiaceae. The description of the genus given by MIQUEL is much more detailed than the original one, but it unfortunately repeats its principal errors: the corolla is described as 4- to 6-merous, and its aestivation as imbricate. The male flower dissected by him is preserved in the Utrecht Herbarium; it is a fairly young bud, opened by a longitudinal slit. The corolla lobes had apparently been separated by a slight pressure, but I at once got the impression that it had been insufficient to effect a complete separation, and that the lobes were still cohering in pairs. I have boiled the flower therefore once more, and by exercising in my turn a slight pressure I succeeded in setting all the lobes free. Since then I have seen mature flowers of this and other species in which the isomery of corolla and androecium was unmistakable. MIQUEL’s speculations on the taxonomic position of the genus were based therefore on a false supposition, and need no further consideration; the analysis carried out below will show that KORTHALS was quite right when he placed Praravinia in the neighbourhood of Urophyllum.

Description: A. DE CANDOLLE’s (1830) treatment of the genus Campanula lists 137 species. Many new species were described since, so that the total number of species should be estimated to be at least twice that number. A new monograph of the genus is, therefore, highly desirable (CLIFFORD CROOK, 1951). Any classification into subgenera and sections, based on herbarium studies, is bound to meet considerable difficulties on account of the great uniformity among many floral characters of the various species. Cytological information may prove very valuable in order to arrive at a modern classification of the species within the genus.

Description: The bogs of S. E. Groningen are part of the great peat-marshes extending from S. E. Drente as far as N.W. Germany inclusive. So far as the territory of Westerwolde is concerned, people have begun digging off very early. According to the map by Krayenhoff in 1816 nearly the whole peat-marsh westward from the line Blijham—Termaarsch had already been reclaimed, only a few parts still being covered with the original peat-layer (cf. map, fig. 1). The digging off east of the above line commences at the beginning of the 19th century on the borderland of Groningen and Drente. Borings were performed in three places and the samples pollenanalytically and stratigraphically examined.

Description: Of the family Oenotheraceae the genus Jussieua is the only one occurring in Suriname. The peculiar Oocarpon torulosum (Arn.) Urb., which has been recorded from Amazonian Peru, Brazil, British and French Guiana, Cuba and Santo Domingo, has up till now not been collected in the colony, but on account of its presence in the neighbouring countries it is there also to be expected. As for the name of the only Suriname genus, it was spelled by LINNAEUS in Genera Plantarum, ed. I (1737), p. 126, Jussieua but afterwards in his Flora Zeylanica (1747), p. 75, changed in Jussiaea.

Description: The name Pleiocarpidia was coined by K. SCHUMANN (ENGLER und PRANTL, Natürliche Pflanzenfamilien, Nachträge I, p. 314, 1897) for a genus described in 1873 by HOOKER f. (BENTHAM et HOOKER, Genera Plantarum II (1), p. 71) as Aulacodiscus: HOOKER’S genus had to be rebaptized, because the name Aulacodiscus had been used already in 1844 by EHRENBERG for a genus belonging to the Diatomeae. A proposal made by O. KUNTZE(POST et KUNTZE, Lexicon, 1904) to change the spelling of the name introduced by SCHUMANN in Pliocarpidia can not be accepted, as there is no rule prescribing the transcription of the Greek diphthong in the manner advocated by the proposer. The plant on which HOOKER’S genus was founded, a small tree not uncommon in the Malay Peninsula, had been described already several years before by WIGHT (Calc. Journ. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 144, 1847) under the name Axanthes enneandra. The specific epithet points to the presence of nine stamens in the flower, but this is exceptional: in the flowers investigated by me the ordinary number proved to be seven. The genus Axanthes Bl., to which the species had been referred by WIGHT, was reduced shortly afterwards by BENTHAM and HOOKER f. (Niger Flora,p. 396,1849) and independently by KORTHALS (Ned. Kruidk. Arch. II, 2, p. 194,1851) to Urophyllum Wall. Later HOOKER made an exception for Axanthes enneandra Wight. The flowers of this plant were described by him as 8- to 16-merous, and on account of this character and of the presence of a “peltate stigma” he referred it to a new genus. Afterwards a second species from the same region was described by KING and GAMBLE under the name Aulacodiscus Maingayi, but this proved identical with the first (cf. RIDLEY, Flora of the Malay Peninsula II, p. 64, 1923). A really new species, however, was found in Mindanao: it was described by Merrill as Pleiocarpidia lanaensis.

Description: E sectione Peltaea, Pavoniae speciosae H.B.K. proxima, sed forma folorium, indumento, involucri phyllis peltatis diversa. Suffrutex, caule minute stellato-piloso glabrescente, linea singula pilis simplicibus longioribus vestita in primo internodio ramulorum lateralium adaxiale notato. Folia breviter petiolata, petiolis tomentellis 2—4 mm longis, oblongo-elliptica, elliptica vel ellipticolanceolata, 3—5 cm longa, 1.25—1.5 cm lata trinervia basi acuta vel obtusa, superiora 5-nervia, basi subcordata, acutissima vel subacuminata, margine regulariter serrato-dentata, supra minute stellato-pilosa, oculo nudo glabra, infra dense sed minute stellatotomentella. Flores in axillis foliorum vel in apice ramulorum 2—3-glomeratis, bracteis ovato-triangularibus suffulti, plerumque subsessiles, interdum usque ad 4 mm pedicellati. Involucri phylla fere io linearia birta uniserialia, basi paullo connata, apice lamina foliacea peltata, id est supra basin affixa, anguste elliptica hirta, basi rotundata, apice acuta, appendiculata, 4 mm longa. Calyx cupuliformis, ultra medium incisus, 4—9 mm longus, lobis acutis hirtis, nervis trinis conspicuis, binis intermediis brevibus vel nullis. Petala 2.5—3 cm longa, teste collectore roseo-rubra, sicca rosea, basi atropurpurea. Stamina et styli more generis. Carpella 4 mm longa, mutica, dorso costa perpendiculari instructa, transverse nervosa, dense pubescentia.

Description: Culmi robusti, foliati. Folia lata, linearia, trinervia. Inflorescentia corymboso-paniculata, multispiculata. Spiculae (”spicae” multorum auctorum) parvae, multiflorae. Flores hermaphroditi (”spiculae androgynae” auctorum) perianthio utriculiformi, compresso, vix carinato, staminibus (”floribus masculinis monandris” auctorum) tribus, binis lateralibus tertio anteriore, ovario (”flore foemineo terminali nudo” auctorum) rostrato, basi angustato, haud stipitato, styli ramis ternis. Nux tri-costata, rugulosa. Generi 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: Among the Acanthaceae grown in the glasshouses of the University Botanic Garden, Utrecht, a plant labelled Aphelandra velutina drew my attention, first, because it obviously belonged to an entirely different genus, and secondly, because a description under this name could nowhere be found. The coincidence of these two grounds for bewilderment might be explained by assuming that Aphelandra was merely a perversion, probably caused by the inadvertency of a transcriber, of the true generic name. This sounded plausible enough, but the name itself could not be found, for all attempts to refer the plant to one of the existing genera failed. It looked as if the plant might have been described somewhere, but for the time being there was no indication at all as to the whereabouts of this description. A clue to the origin of the name was obtained some time afterwards when I found in the Utrecht herbarium a specimen belonging to the same species which was labelled Eranthemum velutinum: the specific epithet, therefore, was the same, but the generic name was different and, as I will show presently, nearer to the mark. The specimen, which dated from 1922, had been collected by the roadside in the Buitenzorg suburb Kotta Paris, and had apparently been named by an official of the Buitenzorg Botanic Gardens. It is, however, certainly no native Javanese plant, for the flora of Java, and particularly that of Buitenzorg, is well known, and a rather conspicuous plant like this one could not have escaped the attention: it was obviously a runaway from one of the neighbouring gardens.

Description: The genus Trymatococcus has been published in 1838 by Poeppig and Endlicher in Nova Genera ac Spec. Plant II. p. 30, and the genus was based on the species T. amazonicus. In 1876 Baillon added the species T. africanus to the genus. This gave a peculiar distribution for a genus with two species only: one in the Amazone region and one in West Africa. Later on several new species from Africa were described: three by Engler (T. kamerunianus, dorstenioides, and Conrauanus), one by De Wildeman (T. Gilletii) and one by Pellegrin (T. oligogyna). In 1922 (Archivos do Jardim Botanico Rio de Janeiro vol III. p. 22) Ducke described a second species from Amazonian Brazil (T. paraensis) and said in the notes to this new species that Lanessania turbinata Baill. should be transferred to the genus Trymatococcus and published a new combination (T. turbinatus Ducke). In 1925 (Archives IV. p. I) he emphasized his statements Trymatococcus and published a new combination (T. turbinatus as well as turbinatus and amazonicus have the stamens erect in the bud and not inflexed as was described in the former publications. He also emphasized that the place of Trymatococcus in the system has to be changed and the genus has to take the place taken up to this moment by Lanessania. Among the material of the Moraceae from Surinam which I am studying for the Flora of Surinam, I found also a Trymatococcus species. By the study of this genus I was struck by the peculiar geographic distribution of the genus, which fully supported my observations on the Euphorbiaceae (cf. Lanjouw, The Euphorbiaceae of Surinam pp. 70—84). For the preparation of a map of this distribution I studied the african species and after a careful examination I noted a number of important differences between the african species and the american ones. Part of these differences were never noticed before and no attention has ever been given to these facts. The first error in this case was made by Baillon. Most probably he had not seen T. amazonicus Poepp. et Endl. when he described his T. africanus. This is still more striking as he described in the same paper his genus Lanessania based on L. turbinata, which is a true Trymatococcus species. It is very curious that it was not possible for Baillonto observe his mistake because in his Histoire des Plantes (vol. VI. p. 199) he states „filamentis aestivatione inflexis vel nunc suberectis”. One can not understand why he did not observe that at least one of the species of Trymatococcus is the same as his genus Lanessania. After Baillon’s publication, we could say that we had got two type species, one american (Tr. amazonicus Poepp. et Endl.) and one african (Tr. africanus Baill.). Apparently Engler did not study exactly Tr. amazonicus Poepp. et Endl. when he described his new species though he states (Monogr. Afr. Pfl. fam. I. Morac. p. 28); ”Ein besonders auffallender Unterschied im Bau der Blüte und Frucht is nicht zu constatieren; bei der amerikanischen Art sind die männlichen Blüten dreimännig mit dreiteiliger Blütenhülle, bei den afrikanischen Arten sind sie zweimännig”. Likewise Ducke knew apparently only the american species when he pointed out the new place for this genus in the family. By these reasons only it is explained how confusion has crept into this genus. I have studied many specimens of Trymatococcus from the following herbaria: Berlin-Dahlem, British Museum (Natural History Museum), Kew, Leiden, Paris and Utrecht. I wish to express mv sincere thanks to the directors for their hospitality or fore sending the material on loan.

Description: Es handelt sich hier um ein grosses, zusammenhängendes Hochmoorgebiet, das sich nord-süd über 20 km, ost-west über 10 km ausdehnt. Im Süden und Westen ist es grösstenteils abgetorft. Die besonders im Zentrum und Osten noch erhaltenen Teile sind durch die intensive Trockenlegung meist verheidet; stellenweise, so in den „Engbertsdijkvenen”, wo grosse Flächen heute wenig entwässert sind, findet sich eine lebende Sphagnumdecke (Taf. III). (Lit. 5). Das Moor liegt auf pleistozänem Untergrunde (Fluvioglazial der Riss-Eiszeit und Niederterrasse der Würmeiszeit); im Osten und Westen stosst es an diluviale Rücken; im Nordwesten bildet die Niederterrasse der Vechte die Grenze. Im Südosten und Osten schliesst sich eine ausgedehnte Versumpfungszone an, während sich im Westen zwischen den Hügeln isolierte, ähnliche Bildungen vorfinden. Es handelt sich hier wahrscheinlich um ein Entwässerungsgebiet des Hochmoores. Ein prae-rissglazialer mit nördlichen Erratica bestreuter Rücken dringt vom Osten her, parallel dem Vechtetal, ungefähr bis in die Mitte, in das Moor vor. Für eine ausführliche Angabe der geologischen Verhältnisse verweisen wir auf die „Geologische Kaart van Nederland” vom „Rijks Geologische Dienst” (Blätter Almeloo I und II; Koevorden III und IV). Wir sammelten eine Anzahl Probenreihen. Die angeführten Analysen beziehen sich auf eine süd-nord gerichtete Profillinie im östlichen Teil des Gebietes (Paterswal 1 u. 2, Engbertsdijk, Bruine Haar) und ein Punktprofil im Nordwesten (Boerendijk), nahe dem Vechtetal.

Description: It is to be hoped, that the genus Pandanophyllum Hassk. never will revive, for it is based on a bad generic description and two nomina nuda, P. palustre Hassk. (Harassas tjaai) and P. humile Hassk., the first of which is supposed to indicate Mapania palustris (Steud.) Vill., while the other name has brought about much confusion, as it has been used for Hypolytrum humile (Steud.) Boeck. as well as for Mapania humilis (Miq., partly) Vill. The first validly published description of Pandanophyllum humile Hassk. nomen nudum in Cat. Pl. Hort. Bot. Bog. 1844, p. 297 has been given by Steudel in his Synopsis II (1855), p. 134 and is based upon a specimen collected in Java by Zollinger (n. 1511, Brit. Mus., Paris), belonging to the genus Hypolytrum. So this is the type-specimen of H. humile (Steud.) Boeck. in Linnaea XXXVII (1871—1873), p. 128. Bentham and Hooker, however, accepting the interpretation of Kurz in Journ. As. Soc. of Bengal XXXVIII, part 2 (1869), p. 82 and the revised opinion of Miquel in his Ill. Fl. Arch. Ind. (1871), p. 61, included both species in their section Pandanophyllum of Mapania (Gen. Pl. III, 1883, p. 1056). A quarter of a century later C. B. Clarke divided Benth. and Hooker’s section into two subgenera, viz. Pandanophyllum, including Mapania humilis Vill. and Halostemma (Wall.), including Mapania palustris (Steud.) Vill. Consequently our present section Pandanophyllum sensu Clarke probably excludes both species, which originally belonged to it. One might be inclined to rectify the mistake by changing the name of Halostemma into Pandanophyllum and coining a new name for the other subgenus, but the principal difficulty, caused by the ambiguity of Hasskarl’s generic description can not be solved in this manner. This description calls for a bifid style (perhaps referring to Hypolytrum humile Boeck.) and 3—5 spikelets (not appropriate to Mapania palustris Vill., highly improbable as to Mapania humilis Vill. and Hypolytrum humile Boeck.). The only way out of the difficulty is to reject the name Pandanophyllum as a nomen dubium in the sense of the rules of nomenclature (art. 63) and to rename the subgenus Pandanophyllum Benth. et Hook., sensu Clarke. I propose the name Pandanoscirpus.

Description: JEAN BAPTISTE CHRISTOPHE FUSÉE AUBLET est né à Salon (Provence) le 4 nov. 1720 et mort à Paris le 6 mai 1778. Dès son enfance il se passionna pour l’étude des plantes. Il alla étudier la botanique à Montpellier. De Montpellier il se rendit à Lyon, où il fit la connaissance de CHRISTOPHE DE JUSSIEU et il s’engagea dans le service des hôpitaux de l’armée commandée par l’infant DON PHILIPPE. Dégoûté bientôt de la vie des camps, il prit son congé, et vint à Paris. Là il se logea dans la maison du chimiste VANEL, suivait les cours de chimie de ROUELLE, visitait les environs de Paris en naturaliste et consultait BERNARD DE JUSSIEU comme une bibliothèque, pour nous servir de son expression. Ensuite il s’engagea au service de l’état et fut chargé d’établir à l’île-de-France (Mauritius) une pharmacie centrale et un jardin de botanique. Il s’embarqua en décembre 1752 et arriva vers la fin du mois d’août suivant. Il y fit un séjour de neuf ans, pendant lequel il envoya maintes fois des collections de plantes, de minéraux et d’animaux à la patrie. A peine de retour en France, il reçut l’ordre de s’embarquer à Bordeaux pour la Guyane. Il mit à la voile le 20 mai 1762, et mouilla l’ancre le 23 juillet à l’île de Cayenne. Le 24 sept. 1764 AUBLET prit un moment la direction de l’établissement colonial du môle Saint-Nicolas à Saint Domingue; et au commencement de l’année suivante il revint en France. C’est à Paris qu’il profita des conseils de BERNARD DE JUSSIEU pour mettre en ordre ses collections de plantes et pour rédiger l’important ouvrage, qui a pour titre: Histoire des plantes de la Guiane françoise, Londres et Paris, 1775, 4 vol. in 4°, dont deux de planches. Ces notices biographiques ont été empruntées à la Nouvelle Biographie Universelle, vol. III, Paris, 1852 et à l’introduction précédant son livre et écrite par AUBLET lui-même.

Description: As Prof. Bremekamp has dealt with the genus Pleiocraterium from the taxonomic point of view, I intend to supplement his exposition here with some observations on the ecology of these remarkable additions to the Malaysian mountain flora. Some of these observations have been included already in a general report on the results of the Losir expedition published in Dutch. As a further illustration I am giving two photographs taken from one of the two Sumatran species in its natural habitat. Altitude. Both species were found on the highest parts of the mountains only, viz. Pl. gentianifolium just below the summit of Mt Goh Lembuh, and Pl. sumatranum between our camp at the base of the central Peak of Mt Losir at c. 3250 m. and the summit of the latter at 3460 m. These two mountains lie rather far apart: Mt Losir is the highest top of the Barisan Range proper, whereas Mt Goh Lembuh is a more isolated mountain, rising c. 50 km. NNE of Mt Losir and separated from the latter by a wide depression. The two mountains also differ geologically.

Description: La forme est le phénomène de la vie le plus important. Aussi on pourrait croire que toute étude biologique devait commencer par la forme. En effet aucune fonction n’est imaginable indépendante de la forme, tandis qu’on peut étudier la forme indépendemment de la fonction, par exemple à des objets morts. Cependant depuis Sachs le botaniste moderne est tellement possédé par les conceptions matérialistes et mécaniques, qu’il veut aussi expliquer causalement les formes organiques en oubliant que, même si toutes les formes sont matérielles, cela ne veut pas nécessairement dire que les lois physiques et chimiques qui dominent la matière sont capables d’expliquer la forme, c.à.d. l’organisation des êtres vivants. A l’aide de briques on peut bâtir des bâtiments les plus divers, mais on peut aussi bien construire ces mêmes bâtiments de bois ou de pierre naturelle: le matériel employé n’explique pas le projet de l’architecte. Ce n’est qu’en le contemplant et en le comparant à d’autres qu’on arrive à mieux le comprendre (von Veh, p. 139). La forme („type” ou „idée” dans la conception platonique) est indépendante de la matière. Elle est ce qui reste. C’est par la forme que passe le courant de la cause et de l’effet, comme l’eau passe par un endroit clair d’une rivière (Carus). La forme présente un des problèmes les plus difficiles de la biologie. Le physiologue et le morphologue (deux extrêmes psychologiques) commencent pour ainsi dire aux deux extrémités de la nature, chacun à sa manière (Troll, Meyer), l’un avec sa méthode physique et chimique, l’autre avec sa méthode comparative. Au domaine du premier appartient tout ce qui est dynamique: le métabolisme et la croissance, au domaine du second ce qui est statique: la forme. Que la feuille est la partie principale de la plante, sur cela les physiologues et les morphologues sont d’accord. Le premier la considère comme un organe qui a pour fonctions principales la CO2-assimilation et l’évaporation. Depuis Goethe le second considère tous les appendices de la tige, aussi bien les sépales que les pétales ainsi que les organes sexuels comme des feuilles métamorphosées. Même, sous l’impression de la phyllotaxie des frères Bravais, Nees d’Esenbeck croyait que „la plante n’est rien d’autre qu’une unité de feuilles reliées entre-elles par un ordre défini”. C’est pourquoi on peut aisément considérer la morphologie de la feuille comme le problème central de toute la morphologie. Il est intéressant de se rendre compte comment dans le courant des temps on a essayé d’approcher ce problème de divers côtés. Cela pourrait apporter quelque lumière sur les différentes tendances de l’étude scientifique et sur les manières de penser qui sont caractéristiques pour les différentes périodes.

Description: Notwithstanding the large amount of work spent by several botanists on this family, taxonomy does not appear very satisfactory, and a general agreement on generic limits has not yet been reached. The result has been a perplexing number of generic and sectional names. The present author apologizes for his adding to the number of interpretations. This study of American Sapotaceae, primarily undertaken in connection with the Flora of Surinam, could not have been completed without the generous loan of specimens by the herbaria at Brussels [B], Berlin—Dahlem [D], Kew [K], and Leyden [L]. In 1934 the author paid a short visit to the herbaria at Brussels [B] and at Paris [P]. The collections of this family at Paris are of special interest owing to the fact that they contain the material studied by Baillon, Pierre and Dubard, and bear numerous notes and analytical drawings, especially by Pierre, attached to the sheets. A number of British Guiana Sapotaceae from the Kew Herbarium was received for determination shortly afterwards. The author feels greatly indebted to the directors of the above mentioned Herbaria for their kind help, and particularly to Prof. Dr. A. Pulle, Utrecht, under whose direction this study was undertaken.

Description: Cytological studies on the Rubiaceae with special references to the genus Galium have been done by HOMEYER (1936) and FAGERLIND (1937). EHRENDORFER (1949, 1954, 1955, 1956) described the phylogeny of the section Leptogalium. More detailed cytological and cytotaxonomical investigations appeared by HANCOCK (1942) (Galium palustre L., Galium debile Desv. and Galium uliginosum L.), CLAPHAM (1949) ( Galium palustre L.), EHRENDORFER (1949, 1953) (Galium pumilum Murr.) 1955 (Galium rubrum L. and Galium pusillum L.) and of Galium boreale L. by Löve and Löve (1954) and more recently by RAHN (1961). FAGERLIND (1937) and, previous to him, HOMEYER (1936) determined the chromosome numbers of many Galium species. Later investigations by EHRENDORFER (1949, 1955, 1956, 1961), LÖVE and LÖVE (1954, 1956), PIOTROWICZ (1958), POUQUES (1949), RAHN (1960, 1961) and REESE (1957) confirmed and supplemented this list of chromosome numbers. Many investigators have paid attention to the genus Galium. However, their studies have concerned only with some critical species or groups. Many taxonomical problems remain concerning the genus. SCHUMANN (1891) in ENGLER and PRANTL „Die Natürlichen Pflanzenfamilien” divided the genus in 14 sections which are very distinct morphologically. However, within these sections it is often very difficult to define exactly the morphological differences between the species.

Description: The genus Pausandra Radlk. belongs to the Tribe Cluytieae of the Euphorbiaceae. It was described by Radlkofer in 1870 in Flora LIII pp. 79—95. The genus is based on Thouinia Morisiana of Casaretto. In his paper Radlkofer discussed at length that this species does not belong to the Sapindaceous genus Thouinia, but represents a new genus of the Euphorbiaceae. As at that time female flowers were unknown Radlkofer stated that the systematic position of the new genus was still doubtful, but that most probably it should belong to a new subtribe of the Jatropheae. Two new species were described in the genus in 1873 by Baillon, P. Trianae Baill. based on Pogonophora Trianae Müll. Arg. which was published in 1864, and P. Martinii Baill. based on very young material and erroneously described by Baillon as being 3-merous, as will be discussed below. He placed the genus in the affinity of Argithamnia Sw., which is certainly not right as this genus is quite different both in habit and in flowercharacters. A fourth species was added by Müller Arg. in 1874 in Flora Brasiliensis XI. II., where he inserted the genus in the same group as was suggested by Radlkofer. No more species had been described when Pax published in 1911 his monograph of the Tribe Cluytieae Pax in Engler, Das Pflanzenreich IV. 147. III. He inserted the genus Pausandra Radlk, with the genera Givotia Griff, and Ricinodendron Müll. Arg. in a new subtribe Ricinodendrinae Pax. I think that this is the right position for the genus, though it could be placed in a separate subtribe for its penninerved, glanduliferous leaves and the capsular fruits. It was a pity that Pax published this monograph without studying the original material. He now copied Baillon’s bad descriptions and the lack of a thorough study on the genus caused the publication of several superfluous species in recent years. P. quadriglandulosa Pax et K. Hoffm. and P. extorris Standley described in 1919 and 1929 are the same as P. Trianae (Müll. Arg.) Baill. P. flagellorhachis Lanj. is identic with P. Martinii Baill., while it was proved that the latter species is not trimerous. P. integrifolia Lanj. could not be maintained in the genus. Only the two new species published by Ducke in 1925 were truly new ones. Moreover three new species were recognized in the recent collections made by Krukoff in Brazil. It is for all these reasons that it seemed to me highly desirable to give a new treatment of this genus. Perhaps several of the old and new species can be united, as one can find often only small differences, but for the present I think it advisable to keep them separate. Pausandra Radlk, has been described to be dioecious, but recently it has been proved in some species that they are monoecious, so it is probable that most of them are under special cicumstances.

Description: Among the most remarkable finds made by Dr. van Steenis in the higher parts of the mountains of North Sumatra are a number of cushion plants. Two of these he recognized as Rubiaceae nearly related to Hedyotis verticillaris W. et A., a species occurring in similar habitats in the Nilgiri Hills, India, and in Ceylon. Hesitating, however, to express a definite opinion on their taxonomic position, he sent the material to me for further investigation. As I had occupied myself already for some time with the genus Hedyotis L. and its allies, this investigation offered me a Wellcome opportunity to test some of the principles which I had laid down for the subdivision of this group. Apart from the characters of the fruit I lay stress on the position of the inflorescence and on the form of the stipules. The name Hedyotis itself I wish to restrict to H. fruticosa L. and its nearest allies, i.e. to those species that are provided with terminal inflorescences, an ovary not distinctly produced beyond the insertion of the calyx, and fairly large drupes with apically and ventrally dehiscent pyrenes: to a group, therefore, which roughly agrees with Hedyotis section Diplophragma W. et A.

Description: This is the second paper dealing with Myxomycetes collected by me in the Netherlands, mostly in the neighbourhood of Doorwerth. Specimens of the species dealt with are preserved either in my private collection or in that of the Botanical Museum and Herbarium of the State University, Utrecht (in the last named case the numbers are followed by a “U”), or in both.

Description: Recent study of the copious material of Melastomaceae conserved in the Botanisch Museum en Herbarium at Utrecht has shown the existence of several undescribed species in Surinam and has given new ideas on the taxonomic status of a few other species. These results are presented below, in advance of the treatment of the family in the „Flora of Surinam”. Ernestia Pullei Gleason, sp. nov. Suffruticosa 4 dm. alta. Caulis purpureo-brunneus 4-angulatus dense glanduloso-pubescens, internodiis 10—15 mm. longis. Petioli graciles 5—10 mm. longi glanduloso-villosi. Laminae tenues ovatae usque ad 25 mm. longae 17 mm. latae acutae minutissime serrulatae basi cordulatae 5-nerviae, supra sparse minuteque glanduloso-pilosae, subtus dense cinereo-tomentellae. Paniculae magnae terminales ramosae 8—12 cm. longae multiflorae glanduloso-polisae, bracteis minimis oblongis. Florum 4- merorum non bene conservatorum structura difficiliter et fortasse non rite observanda. Hypanthium tubuloso-campanulatum 8-costatum dense glanduloso-pilosum. Sepala erecta triangularia acuta sparse glandulosa 1.6 mm. longa. Petala non visa. Stamina valde dimorpha. Filamenta glabra erecta gracilia 3-7 mm. longa. Antherae lineari-subulatae, staminum episepalorum horizontales 4.2 mm. longae, connectivo subtereti in semicirculum 1.5 mm. diam. curvato et supra insertionem filamenti in appendices 2 V-forme connatas dilatato, ad angulam externam appendicum inserto; appendicibus in angulo interno ad filamentum affixis, triangulari-subulatis 3.2 mm. longis, infra filamentum attenuatis in calcaria filiformia et interdum calcaribus similibus lateralibus 1 vel 2 ornatis; antherae staminum epipetalorum erectae 3.3 mm. longae, connectivo ad angulam 90° deflexo 1 mm. longo, infra insertionem filamenti calcaria 2 lineari-subulata erecta 1.7 mm. longa gerente. Ovarium superum, teste cl. Pulle in schedis 3-loculare, sed in uno dissecto distinctissime 4-loculare; stylo stigmateque non visis; seminibus cochleatis.

Description: Some months ago the first author published in his Studies in Moraceae II (Rec. trav. bot. néerl. XXXIII, 1936, pp. 254—276) a synopsis of the genus Clarisia R. & P. The second author traced in the Berlin Herbarium a specimen of this genus which had been described in 1821 as Excoecaria ilicifolia Spreng. As this species is identic with Clarisia strepitans (Fr. Allem.) Lanj., the name of the latter species has to be changed. As in addition some interesting specimens were kindly sent to Utrecht for determination by the Herbaria at Berlin-Dahlem (D), Geneva (G) and the Arnold Arboretum, Jamaica Plain (A), it seemed desirable to publish these notes.

Description: Whilst studying the material of the genus Securidaca for the “Flora of Suriname”, I found it in most cases extremely difficult or even impossible to identify the species. The original descriptions are, as a rule, very short, and they have been based for a good deal on incomplete material: mature fruits, for instance, are often missing. Hence it is not surprising that on quite a number of species the opinions of taxonomists disagree. Accordingly on the one hand we may find in the various collections the most different species lumped together under the same name, while on the other hand one and the same species may appear under several names. A study of the type specimens therefore, was obviously very desirable. I am indebted to the “VAN EEDEN FONDS” for enabling me to visit the Herbarium in Paris, where I could clear up some misunderstandings with regard to the Suriname species. This study includes all the Suriname specimens preserved in the Herbaria of Utrecht, Leiden, Kew, Brussels, Geneva and Berlin, together with the material collected outside Suriname and available in the Utrecht and Paris collections, and the British Guiana plants of the Kew Herbarium. To get an impression of the genus as a whole, several species not occurring in Suriname have been studied, but a thorough investigation was made of the Suriname ones only. The results of this investigation will be given below.

Description: In the present study pollen morphology of the Euphorbeaceae is treated as an additional character in taxonomy. Besides the greater part of the genera occurring in the system of PAX and K. HOFFMANN (1931), most of the genera published after 1931 are studied. The pollen grains have been described with the aid of a terminology as simple as possible. In principle the terminology of IVERSEN and TROELS-SMITH has been followed, although in addition, many improvements of ERDTMAN have been used. One of the simplifications is the rejection of POTONIÉ’s term sculpture. All elements occurring on the endexine are called structure elements; all structure elements together form the structure of a pollen grain. For the sake of consequence endexine apertures and extexine apertures are discussed separately. Different pollen grains are placed in different pollen types. If the differences are of minor importance, the pollen grains are placed in subtypes. Several types can have some characters in common. To express the correspondences, these types are assembled in configurations. As the pollen types in Phyllanthoideae and Crotonoideae differ distinctly, the division of the Euphorbiaceae in these subfamilies is maintained in the discussion of the results. The Phyllanthodieae can be separated in three large groups of pollen types ( Antidesma configuration, Amanoa configuration and Aristogeitonia configuration), which agrees with the grouping of PAX in 1924. The remaining small configurations belong in taxonomic respect to the genera of the Antidesma configuration. In the Crotonoideae many genera possess pollen grains with a croton-pattern. These genera should be treated as a single group. Besides this natural group, the Plukenetiinae possess pollen grains which are clearly distinguished from other genera in the Crotonoideae. Pollen grains of Omphalea are similar to those in the Plukenetia configuration. This pollen-morphological result agrees with the opinion of CROIZAT. The remaining pollen grains in the Crotonoideae are less easy to differentiate in groups. One of the largest configurations is the Mallotus configuration, which includes most genera of the Acalypheae and several genera or other tribes. The Hippomane configuration is another large one. This configuration comprises the tribes Hippomaneae and Euphorbieae. The pollen grains of both tribes are very similar. The genus Pachystroma is pollen-morphologically as well as taxonomically related to the tribe Hippomaneae. Pera, treated as a separate tribe by PAX and K. HOFFMANN, is related by its pollen grains to some genera in the Acalypheae. Dalechampia is habitually related to the genera in the Plukenetiinae. Pollenmorphological data, however, do not support this relation. The pollen grains of Dalechampia are not similar to any other pollen type. The morphology of the pollen grains of the Stenolobeae is in agreement with the opinion of PAX, that any separation of these Australian genera is an artificial one.

Description: 1. The Orchids in the Netherlands have been subjected to a cytological investigation. 2. The division of the genera Orchis (L.) Klinge into two new genera: Orchis (L.) Vermln. and Dactylorchis (Kl.) Vermln. (Vermeulen, 1947), could be confirmed. 3. In Listera ovata (L.) R. Br. the diploid chromosome number is 34. Deviating numbers 2n = 35 and 2n = 36 were counted. Because aberations in chromosome number do not cause morphological differences these aberations seem to be unimportant. 4. Out of the material investigated it might be concluded that for the moment it does not seem to be correct to consider Dactylorchis fuchsii (Druce) Vermln, as a separate species besides Dactylorchis maculata (L.) Vermln. It seems more likely that D. fuchsii and D. maculata represent two types within a complex-species.

Description: Endlicheria Nees (non Presl) in Linnaea 8 (1833), p. 37; id., Progr. (1833), p. 16; id., Syst. (1836), p. 365; Endl., Gen. (1837), p. 321; id., Ench. (1841), p. 197; Dietrich, Synops. Pl. 2 (1840), p. 1332, 1350; Spach, Hist. nat. Végét. X (1841), p. 473; Steudel, Nomencl. ed. 2 (1841), p. 554; Meissn., Gen. I (1836—43), p. 326, II, p. 238; Orbigny, Dict. univ. (1846), p. 259; Lindl., Veg. kgd. (1846), p. 537; Meissn. in D.C., Prodr. XV, 1 (1864), p. 172; id. in Fl. Bras. V, 2 (1866), p. 281; Baillon, Hist. II (1870), p. 480 in adnot.; Pfeiffer, Nomencl. (1873), p. 1201; Benth. in Benth. & Hook., Gen. III (1880), p. 153; Durand, Index Gen. (1888), p. 348 sub Aydendron; Mez in Jahrb. Bot. Gart. Berl. V (1889), p. 111; Pax in Engl.-Prantl, Pfl. Fam. III, 2 (1889), p. 122; dalla Torre & Harms, Gen. (1900—07), p. 178 sub Aniba; Post & Kuntze, Lexicon (1904), p. 197; Lemée, Dict. 2 (1929), p. 857; Benoist in Arch. Bot. V (1931), p. 63; Kostermans in Meded. Bot. Mus. Utrecht 25 (1936), p. 41; id. in Pulle, F1. Surin. 2 (1936), p. 327. – Goeppertia Nees, Syst, l.c., p. 354, 365 (non alibi nec aliis); Endl., Gen., l.c., p. 321, n. 2051; id., Ench., l.c., p. 197; Dietrich, l.c., p. 1332, 1350; Spach., l.c., p. 473; Steudel, l.c., p. 697; Reichb., Nomencl. (1861), p. 70, n. 2659; Meissn., Gen. I, p. 326, II, p. 238; Orbigny, l.c., p. 259; Lindl., l.c., p. 537; Meissn. in D.C., l.c., p. 172; id. in Fl. Bras., l.c., p. 281; Baillon, l.c., p. 480; Pfeiffer, l.c., p. 1473; Benth., l.c., p. 153; Durand, l.c., p. 348 sub Aydendron; Mez, l.c.; Pax, l.c., p. 122; dalla Torre & Harms, l.c., p. 178 sub Aniba; Post & Kuntze, l.c., p. 253; Kosterm. in Meded., l.c. – Schauera Nees in Lindley, Nat. Syst. ed. 2 (1836), p. 202 in adnot. (non aliis nec alibi); Endl., l.c., p. 321; id., Ench., p. 197; Meissn., Gen. II, l.c., p. 238; Orbigny, l.c., p. 259; Lindl., Veg. kgd., l.c., p. 537; Benth., l.c., p. 153; Durand, l.c., p. 348 sub Aydendron; Mez, l.c.; Pfeiffer, l.c., p. 1071; dalla Torre & Harms, l.c., p. 178 sub Aniba; Post & Kuntze, l.c., p. 503; Lemée, l.c., p. 1006. – Schaueria Nees ex Meissn. in D.C., l.c., p. 172; id. in Fl. Bras., l.c., p. 281 (non aliis); Baillon, l.c., p. 480; Pax, l.c., p. 122. – Ampelodaphne Meissn. in D.C., l.c., p. 81; id. in Fl. Bras, l.c., p. 167; Baillon, l.c., p. 473; Pfeiffer, l.c., p. 1071; Benth., l.c., p. 153; Durand, l.c., p. 348 sub Aydendron; Pax, l.c., p. 122; dalla Torre & Harms, l.c., p. 178 n. 2812; Post & Kuntze, l.c., p. 24; Lemée, Dict., l.c., p. 210; Kosterm. in Meded., l.c. – Aydendron Griseb. (non Nees), p.p. in Fl. Brit. W. Ind. isl. (1860), p. 284; Benth., l.c., p. 153; Mez, l.c. – Huberodaphne Ducke in Arch. Jard. Rio de Janeiro 4 (1925), p. 191; Lemèe, Dict., l.c., 3 (1931), p. 661. Type species: Endlicheria hirsuta Nees.

Description: In the years 1954-1957 The Foundation for Biocenological Research (Stichting tot Onderzoek van Levensgemeenschappen, S.O.L.) carried out an extensive study on the vegetation of about 125 former river beds in the Netherlands. They were situated along the great rivers and their branches, viz. Meuse, Oude Maas (“Old Meuse”), Heusdense Maas (“Heusden Meuse”), Rhine, Lek, Merwede, Waal and IJsel. The work was made possible by a grant of the Netherlands Organisation for Pure Research (Nederlandse Organisatie voor Zuiver Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek, Z.W.O.). Dr. M. F. Mözer Bruijns proposed and supervised the investigation, and Dr. V. Westhoff took part in the interpretation of the results. The field work was carried out by A. J. Quené-Boterenbrood (1954-55), W. A. E. van Donselaar-ten Bokkel Huinink (1955-56), J. van Donselaar (1955— 57), Ir. L. G. Kop (1956-57), P. J. Schroevers (1954-55) and E. E. van der Voo (1954-57). Our study had several aims. The collected material had to contribute to our knowledge of a number of plant species and communities, especially of those playing a part in the hydrosere found in various kinds of water. With respect to the communities it should comprise their floristic composition as well as a definition of their habitat. Moreover, the former river beds should be classified according to their plant communities as well as to their abiotical properties. This classification should be useful as a basis for the choice of future naturereserves (see Gorter and Westhoff, 1952; Van Donselaar, 1956; Westhoff and Leentvaar, 1957).

Description: Anaueria Kosterm. in Chronica Botanica IV, 1 (1938), p. 14. Arbores brasilienses foliis sub-oppositis. Flores hermaphroditi ex-involucrati paniculati; tepalis sex tribus exterioribus minoribus. Stamina novem quorum sex exteriora fertilia filamentis in annulum ovarium cingentem connatis antheris liberis bilocellatis sub-introrsis; tria interiora sterilia staminodialia sub-aequilonga. Ovarium subglobosum tubo planiusculo insertum, stylo obtuso brevi stigmate inconspicuo. Staminodia seriei quartae nulla. Bacca magna ellipsoidea pedicello vix elongate cylindrico tepalis non incrassatis persistentibus insidens.