198 SPECIES BLANCOANAE 
but Blanco described this species under Fagara octandra, and 
it is a Melicope, not an Evodia; see Merrill in Philip. Journ. 
Sci. 7 (1912) Bot. 375. The second was reduced by Fernandez- 
Villar to Evodia roxburghiana Benth., a species’ not definitely 
known from the Philippines. Blanco’s descriptions are very 
indefinite, and the species he described might with equal prop- 
riety be reduced to almost any trifoliolate species of Evodia 
with glabrous leaves. I have rather arbitrarily reduced both 
to the Philippine form generally referred to Evodia glabra 
Blume, the most common and widely distributed representative 
of the genus in the Philippines. There is no very definite reason, 
however, for considering the Philippine specimens to represent 
Blume’s species. 
Illustrative specimen from Rizal Province, Luzon, March, 
1915 (Merrill: Species Blancoanae No. 904). aby 
MELICOPE Forster 
Fagara octandra Blanco Fl. Filip. (1837) 67; ed. 2 (1845) 48; ed. 3, 1 
(1877) 90, non Linn.=MELICOPE TRIPHYLLA (Lam.) Merr. — 
(Fagara triphylla Lam., Evodia triphylla DC., Melicope ternata Vid., 
non Forst., M. luzonensis Engl.). 
Bergera ternata Blanco Fl. Filip. (1837) 360 (sp. nov.); ed. 2 (1845) 254; 
ed. 3, 2 (1878) 108=? MELICOPE TRIPHYLLA (Lam.) Merr. 
_ This species is widely distributed in the Philippines. For a 
discussion of the species and its synonymy see Merrill in Philip. 
Journ. Sci. 7 (1912) Bot. 373-378. F.-Villar reduced Bergera 
ternata Blanco to Glycosmis bilocularis Thwaites, a species that 
does not extend to the Philippines. It cannot possibly belong to 
this genus on account of the characters assigned to it by Blanco. 
It must be either an Evodia or a Melicope, and from the distri-. 
bution of the various species of these two genera in the Philip- 
pines, is almost certainly Melicope triphylla (Lam.) Merr. Blan-— 
co’s description is very short and imperfect. Le 
INustrative specimens from Benguet Subprovince, Luzon, May, 
1914 (Merrill: Species Blancoanae No. 16); Rizal Province, 
Luzon, June, 1914 (Merrill: Species Blancoanae No. 673). rae 
LUNASIA Blanco 
LUNASIA AMARA Blanco Fl. Filip. (1837) 783 (gen. et sp. nov.) ; ed. 3, 
3 (1879) 191=Pilocarpus amarus Blanco op. cit. ed. 2 (1845) 540 
(nom. nov.). shod ae 
The genus Lunasia Blanco is a valid one, erroneously reduced — 
by Blanco in the second edition of his Flora de Filipinas to 
