308 



tribes, genera, and Bpecies have been compiled. An attempt has been 

 made t<> make the paper complete so far as Philippine Bynonomy is 



concerned, to account for all the species credited to the Philippines by 

 various authors, and to cite the most important literature references 

 under each species. 



Among the earliest species of Philippine grasses described are the few 

 considered by Cavanilles in his "Icones et Descriptiones Plantarum/' 

 L791-1801, and by Lagasca in his "Genera et Species Plantarum," 1816. 

 These early Philippine Bpecies were based on material collected by 

 members of the Malaspina expedition, but it is evident that in the 

 case of both the above works a considerable number of plants credited 

 to the Philippines were erroneously localized and were really from tropical 

 America and not from this Archipelago. The next work discussing any 

 considerable number of Philippine Graminece is Presl's "Reliquiae llaen- 

 keanae," 1S30, in which 56 species of Philippine, or supposedly Philip- 

 pine, grasses are described. As was the case with Cavanilles and Lagasca, 

 many of the species credited to the Philippines by Presl were really not 

 from this Archipelago but from tropical America. Ilaenke. who collected 

 the material on which tin 1 above work was based, was also a member of the 

 Malaspina expedition. Many of the species proposed by Presl have 

 been figured and discussed by Scribner, 1 who examined the types in the 

 Bernhardi Herbarium at the Missouri Botanical Garden. Blanco, in 

 his "Flora de Filipinas" (ed. 1. 1837; ed. 2, 1845), considers but ;5<> 

 species and varieties of Oraminece, and although his descriptions are 

 vague and imperfect, 1 believe that, with the exception of a \'vw species 

 of Bambusa, they are correctly reduced in the following enumeration. 

 In 1851 Llanos described 29 species of grasses in his "Fragmented de 

 Algunas Plantas de Filipinas," and these are much more obscure than 

 those described by Blanco, and in tny treatment of them 1 have, where 

 consistent, followed F.-Yillar. although in some cases F.-Yillar reduced 

 Planos's species to plants which certainly do not extend to the Philip- 

 pines, thus showing that he had a misconception of them or of those 

 to which they were reduced, or of both. The descriptions of the Philip- 

 pine species of grasses proposed before 1833 are included by Kunth 

 in his "Fnumeratio Plantarum, " while those described previously to 

 1855 are considered by Steudel in his "Synopsis Plantarum (ilumacea- 

 rum," and by Miquel, including those described for the firsl time by 

 Steudel, in bis "Florae Indiae Batavae" (vol. 3, 1859). In L883 

 F.-Yillar published his "Novissima Appendix" to the third edition of 

 Blanco's "Flora de Filipinas,** enumerating 254 species and 28 varieties 

 of grasses, distributed into 72 genera. As this work is a compilation, 

 it frequently happens that the same species is enumerated twice, or in 

 some cases three or even four times under different names in the same 



l Rept. Missouri Bot. Curd., IS!)'). 10, 3&-S9, pis. 1-5',. 



