828 The Philippine Journal of Science 1915 
This species is common and widely distributed in the Philippines, and 
to it should be referred most of the Philippine material distributed from 
the Bureau of Science as Scolopia crenata Clos and as S. luzonensis Warb. 
It is well characterized by its ciliate anther-appendages. 
I think it probable that Banara brevifolia Blanco FI. Filip. (1837) 
426 = Flacourtia parvifolia Blanco FI. Filip. ed. 2 (1845) 560 should also be 
referred here. Blanco’s description is altogether too short and incomplete 
properly to determine the plant he had in mind, and of which he saw no 
flowers. F.-Villar has reduced it to Scolopia dasyanthera Benn., which, if 
correct, would place it under Scolopia luzonensis Warb., for Bennett’s 
designation is only a new name for the plant originally described by Presl 
as Desianthera luzonensis. This fact I overlooked at the time I worked 
over the determinations of Blanco’s species, which accounts for my state- 
ment’ that Scolopia dasyanthera Benn. was a species unknown from the 
Philippines. 
Just how constant are the characters selected by Briquet in distinguish- 
ing the closely allied forms that have, for the most part, been reduced at 
one time or another to form a comprehensive species, Scolopia crenata Clos, 
remains to be seen. In our rich Philippine collections evidences of inter- 
grading forms occur, that to a greater or less degree invalidate the key 
characters adopted by Warburg and by Briquet in distinguishing the sec- 
tions Adenoscolopia and Sphenoscolopia. Elmer 5625, 6363, from Benguet 
Subprovince, Luzon, and Bur. Sci. 10376 McGregor, from Polillo, are in all 
essential characters typical Scolopia luzonensis Warb., and have the peculiar 
ciliate anthers of that species; yet all three specimens have glands at 
the apices of their petioles, or on the leaf margins near the insertion of the 
petioles which would place them in the section Adenoscolopia, and as a 
result necessitate the description of the form as a new species. In my 
mind there is absolutely no doubt but that all three sheets are fairly typical 
Scolopia luzonensis Warb., a species manifestly belonging in the section 
Sphenoscolopia. ¥ 
SCOLOPIA SAEVA (Hance) Hance in Ann. Sci. Nat. IV 28 (1862) 217; 
Briq. in Ann. Conserv. Jard. Bot. Genéve 2 (1898) 46. 
Phoberos saevus Hance in Walp. Ann. 3 (1853) 825. 
Scolopia lanceolata Clos, in Ann. Sci. Nat. IV 8 (1857) 252, p. p., 
quoad pl. Philip.; Vid. Rev. Pl. Vasc. Filip. (1886) 49. 
This species is very similar to Scolopia luzonensis Warb., but is dis- 
tinguished by its entirely glabrous anthers. The following material is ap- 
parently referable to it: 
Luzon, Benguet Subprovince, For. Bur. 10921 Curran: Province of 
Pangasinan, For. Bur. 9632 Zschokke: Province of Zambales, Merrill 2949, 
For. Bur. 908 Maule: Province of Rizal, For. Bur. 428, 2680 Ahern’s 
collector, Merrill 1658. 
I have seen no specimen of Cuming 1061, cited by Clos, but the above 
specimens agree with Hongkong material and with the descriptions avail- 
able. Scolopia lanceolata Clos is based on Phoberos lanceolata W. & A. 
Prodr. (1834) 30, and is an older name than that proposed by Hance and 
accepted by Briquet. The type of Phoberos lanceolata W. & A. was from 
India, and the species is, presumably, different from the Philippine form. 
*Govt. Lab. Publ. (Philip.) 27 (1905) 18. 
