\ 
2 ROBINSON. 
r 
1. Boehmeria blumei Wedd. in DC. Prodr. 16^ (1869} 204.' 
Margarocarpus heterophyllus Wedd. in Ann. Sci. Nat. Bot. IV 1 (1854) 204. 
Boehmeria heterophylla Blume Mus. Bot. Lugd.-Bat. 2 (1856) 204, non Wedd. 
in Arch. Mus. Paris 9 (1856) 351. 
Pouzolsia Jietcropliylla Miq. FI. Ind. Bat. 1 =^ (1859) 260. 
Luzon, Province of Pampanga or Bulacan, Cuming 731 (cotype) : Province of 
Bulacan, Norzagaray, Yoder 224: Province of Rizal, Montalban, Bur. Sci. 9546 
Robinson; Caysnsot, Phil. PL 58 Ramos: Province of Bataan, Mount Mariveles, 
Elmer 6656, Leihcry 607S : Province of Laguna, Lake Colibato, Bur. Sci. 9696 
RoUnson: Province of Cavite, Silang, For. Bur. 7640 MerHtt. Mindanao, District 
of Davao, Sibulan River, Elmer 11198: District of Zamboanga, San Ramon, 
Hallier s. n. : Subprovince of Butuan, Talaeogon, Merrill 7278. 
The question of the priority between the publications of Blume and Weddell 
has already been fully discussed :*i it may again be stated that pages 1 to 400 
of Weddell's monograph are taken as antedating fascicle 13 of the second volume 
of the. Mus. Bot. Lugd.-Bat., which be-ins on page 193. The two species to which 
the name Boehmeria heterophylla has been applied are closely allied, but the 
recent collections liave not served to unite them. 
In our collections, the longer leaves are sometimes opposite the shorter ones, 
more often nearly opposite, still more 'often definitely alternate with them, as 
they were originally described, but there are no correlating characters upon which 
to separate these races, and the matter has probably no systematic importance 
The closest Asiatic alliance of the species seems to be B. monticola Bl., from 
Sumatra, but there are close American affinities, the plants above cited being 
very similar to Pittier d Tonduz 11543, from Costa Rica, unnamed, differing 
superacially only by having wider leaves. 
, Two northern collections, Vanoverhergh 126, Bontoc, and Merrill 4432, Cabayan, ■ 
Bonguet, well matching one another, find their closest alliance here. The struc- 
ture of the stigma is as described iu B. villosa, the apex of the ovary is narrowed 
to a glabrous beak continuous with the pubescent stigma. The place of junction 
with the stigma is the weakest and there is a tendency for a break to occur 
there, but the stigma is often present in well-advanced fiuit. Father Vanover- 
bergh compares the fruiting glomcrule to a Fragaria, and the Benguet specimen 
indicates a similar condition. They are rather easily distinguished by the eye 
from the collections cited under B. blumei, but the differences are difficult to 
define, the serration is not ro coarse and the venation slightly different. Until 
a fuller series of collections is obtained, they may be doubtfully identified as 
B hlumeu A further point is their similarly to the so-called Pouzolzia viminea 
VVedd., at least as represented by Ridley 14558, Perak. Side by side comparison 
of the pistillate flowers, not quite conclusive, as tlie Malav ones were older 
seemed to sliow the differences between Boehmeria and Pouzolzia to be present' 
m spite of very great general similarity. Material received while this paper is 
m press B«r. Soi, 12731 Fenicc, Sablan, Benguet, tends to unite these two collec- 
tions with B. blumei. 
^^I^cal names: alibaguid (Cavite) ; alalasi (Bontoc) ; dapsio (Benguet) ; cag^g 
2. Boehmeria heterophylla Wedd. in- Arch. Mus. Paris 9 (1856) 351, non 
Margarocarpus heterophyllus Wedd. in Ann. Sci. Nat. Bot. IV 1 (1854) 204 
iB. heterophylla Bl.). ' 
Boehmeria cumingiana Bl. Mus, Bot. Lugd.-But. 2 (1856) 199'. 
*^ This Journal 5 (1910) Bot. 471-473. 
