252 Philippine Journal of Science 1919 



brous, 5 mm long. Fruits sparingly appressed-pubescent, oblong- 

 ovoid, terete, about 5 mm long. 



Kwangtung Province, Kochow region, Lai Tung and Shan Mi, 

 To Rang P'eng 27 U (type), 2677, February and March, 1919, 

 the former with the local name ye cha fa. 



This species, dedicated to Mr. C. G. Fuson, through whose 

 interest it was possible to do some field work in the Kochow 

 region, is distinctly allied to Symplocos anomala Brand of Yun- 

 nan Province, from which it differs in its shorter, much less 

 acuminate, fewer-nerved leaves, and somewhat longer, more 

 numerously flowered racemes. 



C"ft SYMPLOCOS CHINENSIS (Lour.) Desvaux MS. in herb. Mus. Paris, comb. 



nov. 

 Myrtus chinensis Lour. Fl. Cochinch. (1790) 313. 

 Symplocos sinica Ker in Bot. Reg. 9 (1823) t. 710; Brand in Engl. 



Pflanzenreich 6 (1901) 34. 



Loureiro's material was from the vicinity of Canton, and his 

 description applies unmistakably to the species currently known 

 as Symplocos sinica Ker. It is common on hills near Canton 

 and is represented by the following Kwangtung material : Merrill 

 10725, Levine 15, 29U, 637, 1787, 2372, 3198, 3W3. The only 

 recorded local name is hak tsz in the Lin District; Loureiro 

 records the Cantonese name as tan quat xiong. Among the other 

 new genera and species described by Loureiro Dicalyx cochin- 

 chinensis Lour, is Symplocos cochinchinensis Moore; Decadia 

 aluminosa Lour, is apparently identical with Symplocos spicata 

 Roxb. ; Drupatris cochinchinensis Lour, is certainly a Symplocos; 

 and Myrtus zeylanica Lour, (non Linn.) is probably a Symplocos. 

 Loureiro's type of Myrtus chinensis is preserved in the herba- 

 rium of the Paris Museum of Natural History. 





LOGANIACEAE 



STRYCHNOS Linnaeus 



STRYCHNOS UMBELLATA (Lour.) comb. nov. 



Cissus iimbellata Lour. Fl. Cochinch. (1790) 84. 



Strychnos paniculata Champ, in Hook. Kew Journ. Bot. 5 (1853) 50. 



Planchon, 12 in excluding Loureiro's species from the Vitaceae, 

 suggests that it might be a Strychnos. I am of the opinion that 

 this is the correct disposition of Cissus umbellata Lour., and 



12 DC. Monog. Phan. 5 (1887) 626. 



