AND LINNJEUS'S ‘ FLORA ZEYLANICA.’ 148 
Linneus quotes also Micheli’s figure (Nov. Gen. t. 108) of the 
very different species from S. America, now semi-naturalized in. 
parts of India, E. Michelii, Lam.  Linnsus's name should be 
abandoned. 
190. Eugenia acutangula, Sp. 471.. Barringtonia acutangula, Gaertn. 
191. Eugenia racemosa, Sp. 471 .. |? arringtonia racemosa, Blume. 
(drawing). 
J92. Psidium Guajava, Sp. 470 .. P. Guyava, L. 
193. Nymphza Nelumbo, Sp. 511. — Nelumbium speciosum, Willd. 
194. Nymphea Lotus, Sp. 511.... N. Lotus, L. 
a T Garcinia Morella, Desr. (the draw- 
195. Cambogia; Gutta, Sp. ed. ii. 728 ing is G. Cambogia, Desr.). 
The speeimens are leaves of the true Gamboge-tree, called 
“ Gokatu ” or * Kana-goraka ” by the Singhalese, as rightly noted 
by Hermann, and the G. Morella, Desr. But the drawings 
show the common “ Goraka," G. Cambogia, Desr., with its edible 
sulcate fruit. (See also Graham in Hook. Comp. Bot. Mag. ii. 
pp. 193-200.) 
196. Euphorbia Tirucalli, Sp. 452.. No specimen. 
197. Euphorbia hirta, Sp. 454 .... E. hirta, L. 
198. Euphorbia thymifolia, Sp. 454. E. thymifolia, L. 
1o. Beppo nitrum SP. | No einen. 
200. Euphorbia neriifolia, Sp. 451.. No specimen. 
201. Calophyllum Inophyllum, Sp. | o Inophyllum, L 
3 ^ NS 
or, roten. 
202. Calophyllum Calaba, Sp. 514. C. Burmanni, Wight. 
The name C. Calaba has been generally abandoned for this 
Eastern species, to which it originally belongs, in consequence 
of Jacquin having figured in 1703 (Hist. Select. Strip. Amer. 
t. 165) as Linnzus’s species the Martinique plant, to which 
Plumier first gave the generic name Calaba, taken from the 
Caribbee name. Linneus (Sp. Plant. ed. ii. 732) accepted Jac- 
quin's determination, and hence makes his own species to include 
both the E. and W.-Indian plants. The name should not be 
maintained for either. 
203. Mesua ferrea, Sp. 515 ...... M. ferrea, L. 
204. Vateria indica, Sp. 515 ...... No specimen? 
Dryander has doubtfully referred to this some leaves in the 
Herbarium, vol. iv. fol. 27. These are certainly not Vateria, 
but possibly Pericopsis Mooniana. The specimen referred to 
by Linngus “in tomo quarto” may possibly be the leaves at 
fol. 36, which appear to be those of some Dipterocarp, though 
not Vateria. (See also Dyer in Fl. Brit. India, i. p. 818.) 
