Tas. 7242. 
SYNANDROSPADIX vexrmiroxicus. 
Native of Tucuman. 
Nat. Ord, AnompeEa.—Tribe DisrrenpacHIER. 
SyNaNDROSPADIX vermitowicus ; foliis floribus coetaneis hastato-cordatis acutis 
-  undulatis nervis infimis approximatis v. basi confluentibus, petiolo 
canaliculato pedunculo robustiore tereti longiore, spatha late cymbiformi 
basi apiceque caudato exceptis late aperto marginibus recurvis extus 
sordide viridi intus pallide purpurascente lineis brevibus saturatioribus 
striolata, spadice crasso spatha paullo breviore basi nuda, inflorescentia 
foem. brevi spathe late adnata, inflor. masc. quam foem. pluries longiore 
et crassiore cylindracea obtusa luride purpurea; fl. masc. stamini- 
bus 3-5 in capitulum longe crasse stipitatum connatis rimis ex- 
trorsum dehiscentibus; 2. fom. paucis sparsis superioribus interdum 
hermaphroditis, staminodiis 4 ovatis obtusis carnosis interdum in 
stamina totidem filamentis dilatatis evolutis, ovario }-5-loculari in stylum 
gracilem stigmate pulvinari attenuato, loculis l-rarius 2-3-ovulatis, 
ovulis erectis orthotropis, baccis 3—0-sulcatis et -locularibus, loculis 
l-spermis, semine majusculo, testa crassiuscula, albumine copioso, 
embryone recto. 
S. vermitoxicus, Hngler in Bot Jahrb. vol. iv. p. 62: Ie. Arac. ined. No: 25. 
Asterostigma vermitoxicum, Griseb. Pl. Lorrentz, p. 199; Symb, Fl. Argent. 
282; Engler in A.DC. Monog. Phanerog. vol. ii. p. 517. ; 
This noble aroid affords, according to Engler, an almost 
unique instance of erroneous description; if indeed it be, 
as he asserts, and I have no valid grounds for rejecting his 
opinion, really the Asterostigma vermitoxicum of Grisebach. 
The latter plant is described by its author as having a 
deeply bipinnatifid leaf, a spathe twice as long as the spadix, 
with male flowers below and female at the top, and a conical 
style with radiating stigmas decurrent to its base. Of these 
characters that of the bipinnatifid leaf is accounted for 
by Engler, after an examination of Grisebach’s specimens, 
by the leaf having been mutilated by insects, and the 
reversal of the position of the male and female flowers 
is, as it appears to me, explained by his having mistaken 
the male flowers for the female, when the anthers 
might represent the decurrent stigmas. Engler’s descrip- 
tion of the plant in his Monograph of Aroids is excellent ; 
it is illustrated by a lithographed drawing from a dried 
JuLy 1st, 1892. 
