NEW OR NOTEWORTHY PHILIPPINE PLANTS, VIII. 217 
ing the separation of this form from Ardisia humilis: “Ardisia humilis Vahl is 
a Ceylon coast shrub which is endemic there and does not extend to the Malay 
Peninsula. The figures A—E on page 128 of Mez’s monograph are Climacandra 
obovata=Ardisia littoralis Andr. which has septate anthers, which A. humilis has 
not. The authors of the “Flora of British India” have mixed up A. humilis and 
A, solanacea Roxb., which is quite a different plant, almost a tree and of inland 
forests, and Mez has correctly separated them, but he has incorrectly put together 
A. humilis Vahl and A. littoralis Andr.” 
Ardisia littoralis Andr. is apparently rare in the Philippines, but.we have 
several very closely allied forms, at least one of which is abundant and widely 
distributed in the Archipelago. 
Malay Peninsula and Archipelago, southern China, and the Philippines. 
Ardisia boissieri A. DC. in DC. Prodr. 8 (1844) 129; Mez in Engl. Pflanzen- 
reich 9 (1902) 129. 
This species is very common and widely distributed in the Philippines, extend- 
ing from northern Luzon to southern Mindanao, a tree of the hill forests at low 
and medium altitudes ascending to at least 600 m in some localities; it reaches 
a height of 15 m in some regions, and is not a seacoast plant. It is very similar 
in all superficial characters to A. littoralis Andr., but can usually be at -once 
distinguished by its anthers being prominently glandular on the back, and not 
transversely septate. What I take to represent this species comprises about 80 
specimens in this herbarium, from all parts of the Philippines, which have, for 
most part, been identified as Ardisia humilis Vahl, many of them so named by 
Doctor Mez. It is very probable that some of the extra-Philippine specimens 
cited by Mez under Ardisia humilis, should be referred to A. boissieri, and it is 
likewise very probable that this name will not prove to be the oldest one. 
Ardisia pirifolia Mez 1. c._ 129. 
This species, the type of which I have examined in the Berlin Herbarium, is 
distinguishable from A. boissieri only by the most trivial characters; in all 
respects except in having the sepals minutely emarginate, it is quite the same 
as A. boissieri. The type was from Polillo, not from Luzon, and the species is 
represented by Bur. Sci. 9292 Robinson, from the same island, Merrill 1101, from 
Baler, Province of Tayabas, Luzon, and apparently also by Elmer 5645 from the 
Province of Union, Luzon, the latter so identified by Doctor Mez. The sepals are 
not always glabrous, but are usually more or less ciliate on the margins; the 
- only character left for specific separation of this form from A. boissieri is the 
very trivial one of the emarginate (very slightly) sepals. 
Ardisia verrucosa Presl Rel. Haenk. 2 (1835) 65; Mez 1. ¢. 134. 
This species is also manifestly closely allied to, and perhaps not specifically 
distinct from Ardisia boissieri A. DC. Mez distinguishes it especially by its 2- 
flowered umbels, but Pres] describes it as having from 2- to 5-flowered umbels, 
and one of the original specimens, in the Prague Herbarium, which I have 
examined, shows at least 5 flowers. Doctor Mez examined the specimen of the 
original collection preserved in the Vienna Herbarium. 
Ardisia macgregorii sp. nov. § Tinus. 
Arbuscula glabra, circiter 1 m alta; foliis lanceolatis, obtusis, coriaceis, 
subtus minute dense puncticulatis, nervis reticulisque densis, obscuris ; 
inflorescentiis axillaribus, solitariis, simplicibus, fructibus subumbellatim 
dispositis. 
