NOTES ON rillLrmXK liOTANY. 127 
Peninsula. The plant from Siam seems to be not "Husseliana;' hut 8. ansirafis 
which is widely difrused througliout tlie Malayan and Pacific regions, and to 
wliicli the Philippine specimens mentioned above must be referred. {J. R. D.) 
SENECIO Linn. 
Senecio luzoniensrs Merr. in Philip. Journ. Sci. 1 (IDUG) Suppl. 244. ' 
This is evidently an endemic species representing tlie series of forms usually 
placed under S. sarracenicus or 8. nemorerusis, whicJi extend from central and 
southeastern Europe through northern China to western China. The Luzon form 
is sufficiently distinguished from Chinese 8. ncmorensis by the sharper angles at 
whicli the secondary nerves of the leaf are given off' from tlie midrib and their 
far shallower curvature. (J. R. D.) 
GYNURA Cass. 
r 
Gynura rubiginosa (Elmer) J. R. Brummoiid comb. nov. 
Senecio nthifj'niosiiN Elmer Leafl. Philip. Bot. 1 (1906) 154. 
LizoN, Province of Benguet, Mount Santo Tomas, }^lmer 62Ji6. 
I cannot see how this plant can U' generically separateil from Gijnura \"uh>- 
liana Elmer, which belongs to a characteristic Tndonesic group of closely allied 
forms. (J. R. D.) 
Gynura Vidaliana Elmer Leafl. Philip. Bot. 1 (1906) 144. 
Luzon, Vidal lJ/90, 1510, 3135; Loher 3601, 3701, 3102; Micholitz s. n.; Merrill 
4593, 4S41 
These apparently represent a single, rather variable species, but more material 
is needed to dispose of Merrill 3937 from Jlouut Arayat, which appears possibly 
to be distinct. However it is possible that this species, with G. purpurascens ' 
DC, Gf. auraniiaca DC, possibly also G. nepalensis DC, and G. Finlaysoniana,, 
constitute but forms of the officinal G. Pseudo-China DC. (J. R. D.) 
Gynura sarmentosa DC Prodr. 6 (1837) 298; F.-Vill. Nov. App. (1883) 
120; Hook. f. El. Brit. Ind. 3 (1881) 335; Vidal Phan. Cuming. Philip. (1885) ' 
122; Rev. PI. Vase. Filip. (1886) 163. 
Gynura affinis Turcz. in Bull. Soc. Nat. Mosc. 24^ (1851) 201; F.-Vill. 1. c* 
120. 
Gynura scahra Turcz. 1. c. 
^c?imo wm(lorcn«t5 Elmer Leafl. Philip. Bot. 1 (1906) 155. 
This widely distributed species is well represented in the Kew herbarium, and 
we are of the opinion that the two species described by Turczaninow, based on 
Cuming^s material, as well as Senecio mindorcnsis Elmer, are all referable to 
typical Gynura sarmcniom DC We have not been able to identify the plant 
collected by Copeland, no. 1258, which was referred by Elmer, 1. c. 147 to 
DeCandoUe's species, and it is possibly not a Gynura. 
70781^—3 
