309 



or in different genera. Assuming that in most cases F.-Villar's identifi- 

 cations were correct, 1 have reduced many of his species in accordance 

 with standard works, excluding those winch he credited to the Philippines 

 and which have never been collected in the Archipelago, and which are 

 not to he expected in these Islands. His list was compiled from such 

 works as Knntlvs "Enumeratio Plantarum." Steudel's "Synopsis," and 

 Miquel's "Florae Indiae Batavae," including such plants as were credited 

 to the Philippines in those works and such others as F.-Yillar thought 

 should grow in the Philippines. Many of the admitted species are 

 followed by the letters "v. v. Bp.," meaning that he had seen living 

 specimens. It is doubtful if F.-Villar's herbarium contained more than 

 a very small percentage of the species enumerated in, the "Novissima 

 Appendix," hut as his herbarium, complete or incomplete, has been 

 destroyed, 2 we can not be certain as to just what plants F.-Yillar had in 

 mind, and in may cases can only surmise what they might have been. 

 F.-Yillar also perpetuated the errors of Cavanilles, Lagasea, and Presl 

 in crediting to the Philippines a number of American species erroneously 

 described by those authors as Philippine, the mistake persisting in the 

 works of Kunth, Steudel, and Miquel, cited above. In 1885, Vidal 

 enumerated 71 species of Philippine Graminetr in his "Phanerogamae 

 Cumingianae Philippinarum," and in 1886, 72 in his "Revision de Plan- 

 tas Vasculares Filipinas," while about the same number is included by 

 Ceron in his "Catalogo de las plantas del Herbario" (Manila, 1892). In 

 1904 Mez and Pilger mentioned 107 species and varieties in Perkins's 

 "Fragments Florae Philippinae," based for most part on my earlier 

 collections. In 1 905 TJsteri enumerated 71 species of Philippine grasses 

 in his "Reitrage zur Kenntnis der Philippinen nnd ihrer Vegetation," 

 based on material collected by himself for the greater part in the Island 

 of Negros. Two papers entitled "Notes on Philippine Grand ne;e" have 

 been published by Hackel. 8 



So far as genera are concerned I have followed Hackel 4 in arrange- 

 ment and nomenclature rather closely, but have retained as genera some 

 groups treated by him as subgenera. In accordance with the action of the 

 Vienna Botanical Congress, J have used Rottboellia L. f., in place of 

 Manisnris Sw. ; Zoisia Willd., for Osterdammia Neck.: Leersia Sw., for 

 Homdlocenchrus Mieg., and Cynodon Pers., in place of Gapriola Adans. 

 Following the spirit of this same Congress, I have retained Setaria 

 Beauv., for Chaetochloa Scribn., and in retaining Dii/ihiria as a genns, 

 I have accepted that name in place of Syntherisma Walt. 



1 have followed Hackel's monograph closely as to generic' limits in 



2 Merrill: Bull. Bureau Agr., Manila (1003). 3, 34. 



"Publications of the Bureau of Government Laboratories, Manila (1005), No. 

 35, 70-82. Phil. Journ. 8d. 1 (1906) Suppl., 2(13 2(10. 

 * Engl, und Prantl: Nat. Pflanzenfam. II, 2, 1-7!). 



