MORACEAE. — BROUSSONETIA 303 
Morus intermedia Perrottet in Arch. Bot. I. 234, t. 7 (1833); in Ann. Sci. 
Nat. sér. 2, XIII. 315 (1840). 
Morus indica Perrottet in Ann. Sci. Nat. sér. 2, XIII. 315 (non Linnaeus) 
(1840). — Spach, Hist. Vég. XI. 47 (pro parte) (1842). 
Morus alba, var. latifolia Bureau in De Candolle, Prodr. XVII. 244 (pro 
parte) (1873). 
According to Perrottet and Spach this represents the true M. indica of Linnaeus, 
but, as I have shown on p. 294, this is a mistake. Poiret’s type came from the is- 
land of Bourbon, where, according to Perrottet (1840), “le Morus indica ou australis 
est sauvage et cultivé." In his first description of M. intermedia, Perrottet says 
that the ovary is “ terminé par deux stigmates sessiles," and his rather bad plate 
does not show a distinct style at the apex of the ovary. But in 1840 Perrottet 
states that the stigma “est toujours pédicellé, bipartite, recourbé en crosse ”’; 
and he says that his M. intermedia “ était évidemment le M. indica de Linné, de 
Roxburgh et des auteurs en général.” Without having seen Poiret’s and Perrottet’s 
types I am not able to decide whether M. australis sensu Perrottet represents a 
distinct species or is a variety of M. alba Linnaeus or a mixture of forms belonging 
to different species. 
BROUSSONETIA L'Hér. 
Z Broussonetia papyrifera L’Héritier in Ventenat, Tabl. Règn. Vég. 
; III. 547 (1799). — Loiseleur-Deslongchamps in Nouv. Duhamel, II. 
26, t. 7 (circa 1804). — Sims in Bot. Mag. L. t. 2358 (1823). — An- 
drews, Bot. Repos. VII.t.488 (1807). — Blume, Bijdr. X. 487 (1825). — 
Siebold in Verh. Bat. Genoot. XII. 28 (Syn. Pl. Oecon. Jap.) (1830). — 
Loudon, Arb. Brit. III. 1361 (1838).— Siebold & Zuccarini in 
Abh. Akad. Münch. IV. Abt. 3, 220 (Fl. Jap. Fam. Nat. II. 96) 
(1846). — Blume, Mus. Bot. Lugd.-Bat. II. 85 (1852). — Seringe, 
Descr. Cult. Muriers, 236, Atl. 11, t. 26 (1855). — Miquel in Ann. 
Mus. Lugd.-Bat. II. 198 (1865); Prol. Fl. Jap. 130 (1865).— K. 
Koch, Dendr. II. pt. 1, 439 (1872). — Bureau in De Candolle, Prodr. 
XVII. 224 (1873). — Franchet & Savatier, Enum. Pl. Jap. I. 433 
(1875). — Franchet in Nouv. Arch. Mus. Paris, sér. 2, VII. 79 (PI. 
David. Y. 269) (1884). — Hooker f., Fl. Brit. Ind. V. 490 (1888). — 
Dippel, Handb. Laubholzk. II. 16 (1892). — Koehne, Deutsche Dendr. 
139 (1803). — Hemsley in Jour. Linn. Soc. XXVI. 455 (1894). — 
Mouillefert, Traité Arb. & Arbriss. II. 1217 (1898). — E. Pritzel in 
Bot. Jahrb. XXIX. 298 (1900). — Shirasawa, Icon. Ess. For. Jap. 
I. t. 38 (1900). — Schneider, Dendr. Winterstud. 100, fig. 112 i-o (1903); 
Ill. Handb. Laubholzk. I. 241, fig. 151 e-g, 155 a-c, g-m, 156 i-o 
(1904). — Matsumura & Hayata in Jour. Coll. Sci. Tokyo, XXII. 373 
(Enum. Pl. Formos.) (1906).— Nakai in Jour. Coll. Sci. Tokyo, 
XXXI. 193 (Fl. Kor. II.) (1911). — Ascherson & Graebner, Syn. Mit- 
