on the Hortus Malabaricus, Part III. 107 
carnosiuscula. Petiolus linearis, anceps, brevis, glaber, non 
stipulaceus. b fie pc 
Flores magnitudine nucis moschatæ pedunculati, cernui, her- 
bacei, glabri: laterales axillares solitarii, terminales sub- 
terni. Pedunculi folio dimidio breviores, penduli, uniflori, 
nudi, glabri, apicem versus incrassati, angulati, articulis 
1—3 divisi. : 
Calyx inferus, monophyllus, coriaceus, crassus, Campanulatus, 
ultra medium quadrifidus laciniis ovatis patulis acutis, fundo 
tectus disco crasso integro staminifero ultra calycis divi- 
sionem producto. Filamenta plurima, indefinita; linearia, 
longitudine calycis incurva, ad disci marginem inserta. An- 
there parve, cordate. Germen turbinatum. Stylus teres, 
staminibus longior, medium versus angulo duplice fléxuosus. 
Stigma maximum, supra convexum, subtus concavum, pilei- 
forme. s ree SSD 
Pomum? orbiculatum, depressum, calyce patente ad basin cinc- 
tum, stylo persistente mucronatum, septis tenuibus carnosis 
in loculos circiter octo; putamine lignoso extra cinctos, ob- 
soletè divisum. Semina angulata, in pulpo nidulantia. 
PANITSJIKA MARAM; p. 45. tab. A1. 
Commeline in his annexed note considers this as the same 
with the Janipaba of Piso, a plant of Brazil, which Linnæus 
called Genipa, but by Willdenow joined to the Gardenia. Whe- 
ther or not this last arrangement be proper I need not here in- 
quire, because the Janipaba is no doubt a plant of the order of 
Rubiaceæ, with opposite leaves, while the leaves of the Panits- 
jika are alternate. Plukenet, although not aware of Commeline's 
error, judged more soundly concerning the affinities of the Pa- 
nitsjika; for in treating of the Pishamin of Virginia (Alm. 180.), 
the Diospyros virginiana of Linnæus, he says ( Mant. 99.), **Inqui- 
P2 rendum 
