XII, C, 4 Brown, Merrill and Yates: Volcano Island 195 
parang association and the second, the Bambusa-Parkia associa- 
tion. The latter according to Gates succeeds the former. 
Gates says very little about his reasons for making this divi- 
sion, which, with modifications, is an attempt to follow Whit- 
ford ** in his description of a very different type of vegetation — 
in an area that unfortunately was not visited by Gates. The 
division as applied to Volcano Island does not seem to be justi- 
fied, and the choice of names is unfortunate. 
While Gates does not so state, it seems evident that he did 
not intend to imply that his Bambusa-Parkia association was 
the same as that described by Whitford, but he simply used the 
term in a very broad sense to denote lowland forests. Whit- 
ford’s *® Bambusa-Parkia formation, described from the base 
of Mount Mariveles, consisted of a mixture of bamboo and trees 
and was regarded as a climax formation. Since Whitford’s 
paper was written, a large area of dipterocarp forest in this 
region has been logged by a lumber company and has changed 
to the Bambusa-Parkia type.” The characteristic bamboo 
Schizostachyum mucronatum (boho), a native species smaller 
than Bambusa blumeana, occurred as scattered clumps in the 
dipterocarp forest. After the forest was logged, these spread 
until in many places Schizostachyum formed almost pure stands. 
The large trees of which Parkia is a representative are, for the 
most part, relics of the former forest, which were left because 
they were not of sufficient value to be removed. Only two of 
the trees mentioned by Gates as belonging to his Bambusa-Parkia 
association are given by Whitford in his list of the eighteen pro- 
minent trees in this association. 
The bamboo of Gates’s association is Bambusa blumeana, which 
has regenerated from rootstocks that were present before the 
eruption and were not killed by the covering of mud and ashes. 
In the Philippines this bamboo is a cultivated form, which 
rarely, if ever, forms new clumps except where planted, and 
therefore it cannot be considered as part of an invading associa- 
tion. 
Gates’s Bambusa-Parkia type is certainly very different from 
that described by Whitford. Gates gives such a brief descrip- 
tion that his conception of it is not clear, and we are unable to 
identify it with any of the usual types found in the Philippines. 
When Gates mentions the occurrence of this type, he evidently 
* Whitford, H. N., Philip. Journ. Sci. 1 (1906) 373. 
” Whitford, H. N., loc. cit. 
" Brown, W. H., and Mathews, D. M., Philip. Journ. Sci. A 9 (1914) 457. 
