COMPOSITAE 383 
tachya Kurz, a species that does not extend to the Philippines. 
There is very little reason for even considering it a Barringtonia, 
Llanos’s description being exceedingly vague and imperfect. 
Brabejum ? caliculatum Blanco Fl. Filip. ed. 2 (1845) 39 (sp. nov.); ed. 
8, 1 (1877) 72 (calyculatum) =LORANTHUS BLANCOANUS F-.-Vill. 
(type!) =? 
A species of wholly doubtful status, certainly no representa- 
tive of the Loranthaceae, as Blanco describes the ovary as 
superior. Loranthus blancoanus F.-Vill, is merely a new name 
for Brabejum caliculatum Blanco. Attempts to locate this spe- 
cies in Cebu under the Visayan name malabachao, cited by Blanco 
for it, brought in specimens of Bruguiera cylindrica Blume that 
do not agree at all with Blanco’s description. I can make no 
suggestion as to its proper place. 
Celosia bicolor Blanco Fl. Filip. (1837) 191 (sp. nov.) =Celosia glauca 
Blanco op. cit. ed. 2 (1845) 135; ed. 3, 1 (1877) 242, non Rottl.—? 
Fernandez-Villar reduced this to Celosia philippica (Weinn.) 
Steud., a species entirely unknown to me. If Blanco’s descrip- 
tion be correct, Celosia bicolor Blanco can be no amaranthaceous 
plant. His specimens were from Malabrigo Point, Batangas 
_ Province, Luzon, and he states that it was to be found in many 
regions. I know of no Philippine species that conforms with 
his rather imperfect description, but in some particulars it is 
suggestive of Ammannia of the Lythraceae. 
Malsherbia globosa Blanco Fl. Filip. ed. 2 (1845) 454 (sp. nov.); ed. 3, 
3 (1879) 54=? 
Fernandez-Villar reduced this to Hydrangea oblongifolia Blume, 
a species that does not extend to the Philippines, and one that 
does not conform to Blanco’s description in any particular. 
The description of Malsherbia globosa applies to a very strongly 
marked and characteristic plant, but I can suggest no reduction 
for it. The description of the leaves and stem conforms well 
to Medinilla magnifica Lindl., but the description of the single 
flower seen by Blanco applies to some entirely different plant. 
His material was from Bolhoon, Cebu, the plant there known 
as mampol. 
Mangifera pinnata Blanco Fl. Filip. (1837) 182; ed. 3. 1 (1877) 231, non 
Linn. f., nec Lam.=? 
A species of wholly doubtful status except that it is perhaps 
a representative of the Meliaceae or Burseraceae. It has nothing 
to do with Mangifera pinnata Linn. f.=Spondias pinnata Kurz. 
Blanco’s description is very indefinite and imperfect, and he 
states that the tree was “scarcely known;” he cites no locality, 
