464 194. URTICACEH: ARTOCARPE EE. 
29. Ficus leucantatoma, Poir. in Lam. Encycl. Suppl. V. p. 654; 
Mig. in Ann. Mus. Bot. Lugd.-Bat. ii. pp. 283, 296 ; King in 
Ann. Bot. Gard. Calc. i. p. 119, t. 157. 
Ficus rapiformis, Roab. Fl. Ind. ii. p. 551; Wight, Ic. Pl. Ind. Or. 
t. 637. 
Ficus septica, Rumph. Herb. Amb. iii. p. 153, t. 96 ; Mazim. in Mél. Biol. 
xi. p. 335. 
Ficus radiata, Decne. in Nouv. Ann. Mus. Par. iii. p. 494. 
Covellia radiata, Miq. in Fl. Ind. Bat. i. pt. 2, p. 328. . 
Ficus Oldhami, Hance in Ann. Sc. Nat. 5"* série, v. p. 242 ; Maxim. 
in Mél. Biol. xi. p. 335. . 
Covellia venosa et C. rapiformis, Mig. in Hook. Lond. Journ. Bot. vu. 
y p. 464 et 468. 
Formosa: Tamsui (Oldham, 542, 553 !), Kelung (Ford, 38 !), 
Apes Hill Takow (Playfair, 165, 199 9), without locality 
(Swinhoe !), Tamsui (Morse, hb. A. Henry, 1731!) ; Luchu 
Archipelago (JWright!) Mus. Brit. ; Herb. Kew. 
Java to Timor, and in the Bonin Islands. 
23. Ficus nervosa, Heyne in Roth’s Nov. Sp. Pl. p. 888; 
Benth. Fl. Hongk. p.327 ; Maxim. in Mél. Biol. xi. p. 333; 
Hook. f. Fl. Brit. Ind. v. p.512 ; King in Ann. Bot. Gard. Calc. 
i. p. 53, t. 65; Wight, Ic. Pl. Ind. Or. t. 660 (angustifolia). 
Urostigma nervosum, Mig. in Hook. Lond. Journ. Bot. vi. p. 585. 
Ficus angustifolia, Seem. Bot. Voy. * Herald,’ p. 412, an Rozb.? 
Formosa: Kelung (Ford, 39 !), South Cape (A. Henry, 1999 !), 
Bankinsing mountains (4. Henry, 116, 416, 1679!) ; Kwanc- 
tune: Lantao Island (Ford’s native collector, 40, 1888 !); Hone- 
KONG (Champion! Seemann! Wright !). Mus. Brit. ; Herb. 
Kew. 
Eastern India, Burma, Malay Peninsula and Archipelago. 
Seemann and Bentham both refer F. angustifolia, Roxb., to 
this species; but King refers it to F. glaberrima, Blume, yet 
citing Wight’s plate 660 under F. nervosa. 
24. Ficus obscura, Blume, Bijdr. p. 474; King in Ann. Bot. 
Gard. Calc. i. p. 81, tt. 102 et 103, et in Hook. f. Fl. Brit. Ind. 
v. p. 521. 
Formosa: Bankinsing (4. Henry, 124!). Herb. Kew. 
Eastern India, Burma, and Malaya. 
The Formosa plant does not agree exactly with any of the 
specimens at Kew referred to this species, but there is no obvious 
character to separate it. 
