PHILIPPINE BORAGINACEJE. 697 



though the Apo specimen which is in flower seems to be cospecific and is less 

 pubescent than the plants from northern Luzon; the stems have the appressed 



pubescence directed downward except toward the apex; the fruit is about mm 

 in diameter. 



China, Malaya, India, eastern Africa. 



!). BOTH RIOSPER MUM Bunge. 



Bothriospermum tenellum Fisch. & Hey. Ind. Sem. (1835) 24. 



Awhusa tenella Hornem. Hort. Hafn. 1 (1812-1815) 170. 



LUZON, Province of Benguet, Bagnio, Elmer 57? J, Williams tS59. 



There is difficulty over the specific name, involving species in two genera. 

 Hornem. Enum. PI. Hort. Bot. Hafn. (1807) 3, enumerated Anchusa Irnella Herb. 

 Vahl, with no additional data, so that the name is a mere nonien nudum. The 

 plant was Cynoglossum denticulatum DC. Prodr. 10 (1840) 150, with no other 

 earlier synonyms. 



In 1813, Hort. Peg. Bot. Hafn. 1: 176, Hornemann definitely published An- 

 chusa tenella, the basis of the present species, and added as a note: "In Herb. 

 Vahlii asservatur sub nomine Anch. zeylanica planta huic similis, sed cum 

 inflorescentia (Raceiuus) differt, banc novam esse speciem opinatus sum." 



Jacquin, Eel. 1 (1811-1816) 47, pi. 29, has the following: "29. Anchusa zey- 

 lanica. Anchusa zeylanica, herbacea caule prostrato, foliis ovatis, hirsutis; 

 lloribns solitariis interfoliaceis pedunculatis. Anchusa zeylanica. Herb. Vahlii. 

 Hornemann. Kmiiner. plant, horti botanici hafniensis. 1807." This is followed by 

 a description of a plant, presumably that from which his diagnosis was drawn, 

 which lias been found by DeCandolle and others to be the same as Bothriosper- 

 iniiin tenellum. 



The difficulties thus are two. the first a question of fact, whether Eornemann's 

 or Jacquin's name is the older, the other a matter of interpretation, as to which 

 of tin- two species is to be considered the type of Anchusa zeylanica Jacq. 



Bibliographic research can alone decide the former, but the probabilities, based 

 upon the number of pages in his volume, give the preference to Jacquin. It seems 

 ileal-, moreover, that he took the name from Hornemann, believing that he had 

 the same species as the plant of the Vahl herbarium: had Hornemann actually 

 published A. zeylanica, there would Ix- no other option than to identify Jacquin's 

 -pecies with Cynoglossum denticulatum, making necessary a change in its specific 

 name. Bui since I. eylanica Vahl ex Hornem. is a nomen nudum, it is appa- 

 rently better to retain the name for the plant that Jacquin actually had and 

 described, namely Bothriospermum tenellum, leaving the question simply bne of 

 priority of publication. 



To Dr. 0. H. Ostenfeld. I am greatly indebted not only for copies from the 

 three publications here cited, but also for a reexamination of the specimen in 

 Vahl's herbarium. 



Northwestern Himalayas to Japan and Formosa. 



10. TRIGONOTIS Stev. 



Trigonotis philippinensis Men. in Philip. Journ. Sci. 1 (1906) Suppl. 228. 



LUZON, Province of Benguet, Pauai to Baguio, Merrill J f 700 ; Pauai. Bur, Sci. 

 'i',',J Manns: Mount Pulog, For. Bur. U>W t Outran Merritt d Zsohokke, 



Endemic, much the farthest southeastern extension of the genus. 



Young flowers of this species, when compared with others taken from Indian 

 material of Eritrichium Striatum Decne., showed about equal curvature of the 

 receptacle in the two species: in fruiting specimens of T. philippinensis the 



