44 The Philippine Journal of Science 1915 
Monocera isotricha Turcz. in Bull. Soc. Nat. Mosc. 19? (1846) 494; Walp. 
Ann. 1, (1848) 112. 
Elaeocarpus lancaefolius F.-Vill. Novis. App. (1880) 381, non Roxb. 
Elaeocarpus oblongus F.-Vill. 1. c.; Vid. Sinopsis Atlas (1883) ¢t. 21, f. 
A. (poor), Rev. Pl. Vasc. Filip. (1886) 72; Perk. Frag. Fl. Philip. 
(1904) 100, p. p.; Merr. in Philip. Journ. Sci. 1 (1906) Suppl. 90; 
Aug. DC. in Elm. Leafl. Philip. Bot. 2 (1909) 636, non Gaertn. 
Elaeocarpus isotrichus F.-Vill. 1. c.; Aug. DC. 1. ¢. 
Elaeocarpus philippinensis Warb. in Perk. Frag. Philip. (1904) 100; 
Aug. DC. 1. c. 636. 
This much named endemic species is of wide distribution in Luzon and 
Mindoro, its oldest valid specific name being here adopted. Blanco’s descrip- 
tion is quite good and agrees perfectly with the material cited below. It 
is, moreover, the only form known to me from Luzon to which his descrip- 
tion can be referred. His material was from the Province of Batangas, 
and his specific name is from its Tagalog name calomala. 
Elaeocarpus isotrichus (Turcz.) F.-Vill. has been considered by several 
authors as a species of doubtful status. It was based on Cuming 886 in 
Turezaninow’s herbarium, but this number in other herbaria is Medinilla 
cumingii Naud. Through the kindness of the Director of the Botanical 
Institute of the University of Kharkoff I have been able to examine Turcza- 
ninow’s type, and find it to be the common Luzon form, identical in all 
respects with the species recently described by Warburg as Elaeocarpus 
philippinensis; of the later I have examined the type in the Berlin Herba- 
rium, an unnumbered specimen of Cuming’s collection. 
Elaeocarpus oblongus Gaertn. apparently does not occur in the Philip- 
pines, the numerous specimens so named having been determined as such 
through error. The exact status of Gaertner’s species is doubtful, as it 
was based primarily on Ganitrum oblongum Rumph. Herb. Amb. 3: 161, 
t. 102, from which the specific name was taken. The only description 
given by Gaertner is that of the fruit, taken from a specimen in the Leiden 
Herbarium, its origin not indicated. Rumphius’s figure represents a plant 
with entire leaves, a form entirely different from the Elaeocarpus oblongus 
of all modern authors except Gaertner and DeCandolle. 
LuzON, without definite locality, Cuming 836 (type of Monocera isotricha 
Turcz.), Cuming s. n. (type of Elaeocarpus philippinensis Warb.): Sub- 
province of Benguet, Elmer 6084: Province of Bataan, For. Bur. 2987 
Borden, For. Bur. 2852 Meyer, For. Bur. 17602 Curran: Province of 
Rizal, Phil. Pl. 1065 Ramos, Bur. Sci. 2665 Ramos, Merrill 1719, For. 
Bur. 454, 2906, 3201 Ahern’s collector: Province of Tayabas, For. Bur. 
6693 Kobbe. MINDORO, Merrill 1174, 2875, Whitford 1892, For. Bur. $727, 
4059 Merritt. 
THYMELAEACEAE 
AQUILARIA Lamark 
AQUILARIA MALACCENSIS Lam. Encycl. 1 (1783) 49; Gamble in Journ. 
As. Soc. Beng. 757 (1912) 264. 
Luzon, Province of Camarines, Salauigan, For. Bur. 21452 Alvarez, 
May, 1914. 
The identification was originally made from Gamble’s description, Alva- 
rez’s specimens being in fruit, no flowers available. Through the kindness 
of Mr. I. H. Burkill, director of the Botanic Garden, Singapore, I have 
