289 
Notes on two little-known Genera connected with the SOUTH AMERICAN 
FLORA; by GEORGE BENTHAM, Esq. 
TAPURA, Aubl. (Nat. Ord. Chailletiacec.) 
The small Order of Chailletiacee was established by Brown in his ap- 
pendix to Tuckey's Congo, founded on De Candolle's genus Chailletia, 
with which he united Leucosia and Dichapetalum of Dupetit-Thouars, 
and associated in the same family Tapura of Aublet and an Indian 
genus since published by Roxburgh under the name of Moacurra. As 
however this Indian species and several African ones were then only 
indicated by Brown, not described or even named, the Order was, at the 
time of the publieation of De Candolle's Prodromus, limited to seven 
species, viz. two from tropical America, two from tropical Africa, two 
from Madagascar, and one from Timor. This number has now in- 
ereased to about twenty-six species more or less known, of which ten 
are from tropical America, seven from tropical Africa, one from South 
Africa, two from Madagascar, and five or six from East India and the 
Eastern Archipelago*. These species are distributed into four genera : 
Chailletia, the most numerous in species, is represented in the three 
tropical continents, Moacurra is entirely East Indian, and Tapura and . 
Stephanopodium are confined to South America. 
The position of the Chailletiacee next to Celastracee and Aguifo- 
liacee, alluded to in the Niger Flora, p. 279, and in some modern 
general works, has been further confirmed by the observations of Miers 
(Contrib. p. 51), and may now be considered as generally admitted. 
Of the four genera above mentioned, Chailletia and Moacurra have 
regular flowers, with five distant bifid petals and five stamens, all an- 
theriferous, and are distinguished by the fruit, which is drupaceous in 
Chailletia and capsular in Moacurra. Tapura and Stephanopodium are 
monopetalous or rather gamopetalous, and more or less irregular, Ta- 
* No. 9016, from Singapore, of Wallich’s Catalogue appears to be identical with 
Chailletia Timorensis, DC.; Griffith gathered fine specimens of a much more to- 
mentose variety (or species?) in Malacca; Wallich’s n. 4038 from Tavoy is very 
near to both, but almost glabrous. Cuming’s n.1788 and 1192 from the Philippines 
are nearly allied, but differ in the shape and indumentum of the leaves, and in some 
other respects, and probably constitute one or perhaps two distinct species. There 
are also two species from Ceylon and one from Malacca, coming nearer in habit to 
the Moacurra gelonioides, but which, for want of the fruit, I am unable at present to 
determine with certainty. 
VOL. V. 2P 
