388 BOTANY OF THE VOYAGE OE H.M.S. HERALD. 
Many of the flower-heads are swoUen to a globular shape, larger than the sound flowcr-heads, appa- 
rently caused by an insect, perhaps belonging to a species of Cynifs. Tor in dissecting them I always 
found aU parts of the flower and fruit destroyed, and on the ground some oval cavities, enclosing smaU 
bodies, which seem to be the chrysalis of an insect. 
302. DuHALDEA Chmensis, Be Cand. Prodr. vol. v. p. 366 (1836).— Hook, et Am. Hot. Beech. 
p. 265 {\SS7) .—Blumea Chinensis, Hook, et Am.! I.e. p. 195 (1836), non De Cand. Prodr. I.e.— 
Bhmea Arnottiana, Stcudl. ! Norn. Hot. edit. 2. p. 210 (1841).— 7wm^« Cappa, De Cand. ! Prodr. vol. 
V. p. 469. n. 31—7. ohionga, De Cand. ! 1. c.—/. Pseudo-Cappa, De Cand. ! 1. c.— Vernonia (Lepi- 
daploa) congesta, Benth. ! in Lond. Journ Bot. vol. i. p. 487 (1842), et in Hook. Journ. Hot. and Kew 
Misc. vol. iv. p. 232 (1852).— Ferwonia eriosematoides, "Wlprs. ! in Nov. Aet. Acad. Cecs. Leop. Carol. 
vol. xix. suppl. 1. p. 254 (1843).— Koywima eriosematoides, Wlprs. ! Bep. Bot. Syst. vol. vi. p. 317 
(1816). Very abundant (Hinds, Champion, teste cl. Benth.; Ilance ! Secmaiin!).* 
This beautiful plant has had the misfortune of having been mistaken by some authors, although De 
(ilanduUe has already, in 1836, shown it to be the type of a well-defined and good genus. Hooker and 
Amott, 1. c, simultaneously with De Candolle, took it for a new species of Mumca, but soon after recog- 
nized it themselves as Do CandoUe's Duhaldea Ghinensis. Steudel named it Blamea Atviottiana. Bentham 
took it for a new species of Vermmia. "Walpers, 1. c, also brought it to Vernonia as a new species, and a 
few years after referred it to Moquinia. I have examined authentic specimens, ticketed in Walpers' own 
handwriting, in the Royal Herbarium at Berlin. Finally Do Candolle, to make confusion worse confounded, 
created three new species of Inula (Z Cappa, I. Bseudo- Cappa, and I. ohhjiga) of it. 
De CandoUe's generic diagnosis of DuJialJea is very characteristic and carefully drawn up, but in a 
single point defective. lie states the anthers to be ecaudate, but they are truly caudate, the basilar 
appendages being long, and often somewhat lacerate at their end. This fact is of a value in De CandoUe's 
classification, because henceforth the genus must be removed from the first subtribe of Asteroidew, the 
Asterinea, and transferred to the fourth, the Inulecs, where its systematical position will be much more 
natural. On the other hand, the lanceolate stigmatical branches of the style are somewhat attenuate at 
their apex, and not so blunt as for the most part in Inulcw ; we meet however with the same fact, but 
reversed, even in a genus {Eupaiorium). Most of the species of JSupaformm have, as is well known, a 
style with long, cyliudraccous, flattened, somewhat obtuse but equal stigmatical branches; in Evpatonum 
leucoceplialum, Benth., the branches are much claveUate at the top, or more correctly, truly knot-shaped. 
"When such an exception to the principle is admitted (and surely with good reason) in a genus of great 
extent, this cliaracter (viz. tlie very end of the stigmatical branches being more or less obtuse) can have no 
greater value either in a whole tribe, than in a genus containing but a few species. There can therefore be 
no doubt that the genus Inulasier, C. H. Schultz, Bip., must be merged in the older genus Duhaldea, De 
Cand., of which it has quite the habit, and the compound cymes arranged in a terminal short panicle. A 
careful examination of the two plants gave these results :— Between Duhaldea Chincmis, De Cand., and 
Inulaster macrophyUus, C. H. Schultz, Bip., xa Rich. Tent. Flor. Abyss, vol. i. p. 399, and in "Wlprs. Ann. 
Bot. Syst. vol. ii, p. 843, there is no other difference in the structure of the flower and fruit than that the 
stigniatic branches of the latter are somewhat more blunt, and the achfenia furrowed and glabrous, with a 
very small basilar callus, whilst in the former the achjenia (not quite ripe) are hairy, and the callus is some- 
* Inula Britannica, De Cand., Fl. Fr. vol. iv. p. 149.— /««?a Britannica, Linn. Sp. 1237.— De Cand. 
Prodr. vol. v. p. 467. n. 22. Shanghai (C. F. Tonnerre !). 
I do not know whether this widely-spread European plant has previously been found in China ; but 
the single specimen cannot be distinguished in the sHghtest from the small-leaved forms of the European 
plant. 
