I'liiurnxK sPKOiEs of pandaxus. 61 
angiistatae, irregiilariter liexagonae, siilcato-angulosae, in vortice 5.5 cm 
latac, tnincatac, siibplanae, loculis 9-11, latis, convexis, stigniate 1ato, 
sessili vel subsessili, proiuiiienti abi'Tipte terminatis, snlcis iiiterlocula- 
ribus profundis. 
Semerara, Merrill JfiJfO, July, 1905. in open grass lands along borders of 
thickets but ne:ir the sea. 
Gaudichaiid's type phalanges are preserved in the Botanical !MuM'uni at Paris, 
doubtfully labeled "India;" but 1 do not think Pandanua Linnaei to be at all an 
Indian plant, and rightly Sir Joseph Hooker, in his "Flora of British India," 
6: 4()8, says of it, "Nothing is known of its origin." Apparently it nuist be 
considered as a Papuan S|>ecies which extends to tlie Philip]>ines, U'canse Dr. 
Beccari broutrht it from the Kov Islands, and in the Kew Herltariuni tiierc is 
a specimen from the Aru Islands, collected by Mr. Moseley of the Challenger 
Expedition. 1 liave also received the fruits of this Paitdanus, together with other 
species closely allied to it, from Peru Ishmd. one of the Gill>ert Group. 
Professor Warburg, in Kngler's Pflanzenreicli. 3: 4(i, reduces Poixfanufi Linnaei 
Gaud, to PamUiiiu.s icctorius Sol., while Count Solms-Laubacli in Linnaea 42 
(1878) ()", only says of it: "Conferas Pandanum fascicular cm Lin." (=^7'. 
Icotorhta Sol.) ; hut I tliink it better to consider it as a distinct species. 
Mr. Merrill named the above specimen fr(nn Seniorara Island Ptuidnnns 
exaliatus Blanco, but in his paper on the identification of Blanco's species' 
writes of /*. exaltatus: "Erroneously reduced by \ illar to P. fascivularis Linn. 
Blanco evidently iiu-ludes two species in his description, one form growing in the 
mountAins, the other at the seashore; the latter is certainly Pantlunuft fectoriiift 
Sol., what the former is, can not be determined from Blanco's description;" and 
later in a manuscript note which accompanies his herl>arium specimen no. 4140, 
Mr. Merrill says: "From Bhuico's description 1 am confident that he included two 
species in Putahiuus exaltatus, one from the mountains and (me from the seashore. 
The one from the mountains is undoubtedly the species I have described as 
Paudanus aruyaten.sis, and I am confident that the present no. 4140, represents 
the other form; 1 believe it advisable to consider this form as the representative 
of Blanco's species." 
Blanco's description, liowever, does not api>ear to me to include two species, 
but only one, that from Mount Tala, which, I agree with Mr. Merrill, is the same 
as J'awiauuft arayatensifi. Bhmco speaks incidentally in the note, not in the 
description, of another Pandanitft, growing in Laguna, and of this he says: "Hojas 
• • * cocidas en agua hacen con ollas unos petates gruesos Ihimados bangcoan 
los inilios de Tala. asi^'como h)s de La Laguna c<m su Panydan Sahofan que es tan 
semejante :1 este, que tal vez son una misma eosa." It does not seem to me at all 
probable that the species from Laguna can be the same as that of the mountains, 
and as Blanco does not imlicate any distinctive characters for the Pandanus from 
Laguna, I do not consider that the name of /'. exaltatus was applied by Blanco 
to two species. However, the Pandanus collected by Mr. Merrill no. 4140, Seme- 
rara Island, is certainly to be referred to P. Linnaei, which in my opinion is 
distinct from P. tectorius Sol., and also different from P. exaJtatv^ Blanco. 
(2) Pandanus tectorius Sol. ex Parkinson Journ. Voy. TT. :sr. S. Endeavour 
(1773) 40. 
This is the most diffiise and polymorphic species of the geiuis, and is the only 
one extending over both the Tndo-Malayan and Polynesian regions. It is proUible 
that its wide geographical distribution niay be explained by its growing on the 
'dovt. Lah. Pnhl. (Manila), 27 (11)05) 89. 
