w RUBIACEA. Wenssanash 
SUBTRIBE I. RONDELETIEH. DC. 
Stipules solitary or 2 on both sides, free from the petioles, and neither forming 
with them a sheath not split into bristle-shaped segments. Segments of the corolla 
more or less twisted in sstivation. Stamens 5, (except in Bikkia, Greenea, and 
some species of Rondeletia.) 
IX. WENDLANDIA. Bartl.; DC. (partly). 
Calyx-tube somewhat globose, often striated: the limb very short, com- 
posed of 5 small persistent teeth. Corolla with the tube longer than the cà- 
lyx, widest at the throat, glabrous or nearly so on the outside : limb spread- 
ing, 5-lobed ; the lobes oblong or lanceolate, acute or obtuse, imbricated and 
slightly twisted in sestivation, and forming a globose or oval head to the 
flower-bud. Stamens 5: filaments springing from the very top of the tube, 
often very short: anthers oblong, exserted, oscillatory. Ovary crowned with 
a fleshy disk. Style exserted, filiform. Stigma of two pretty large, oval, 
thickish segments. Capsule globose, crowned with the limb of the ca- 
lyx, 2-celled, splitting at the apex, loculicidal. Seeds minute, numerous m 
each cell.— Trees or shrubs. Leaves coriaceous, oval or lanceolate, petioled. 
Stipules solitary on each side, broad at the base, acuminated. Panicles thyr- 
soid, terminal, many-flowered. Flowers white, small, very shortly pedicel- 
led, forming spikes or fascicles along the ultimate ramifications of the panicle. 
Of the pentandrous species enumerated by De Candolle, W. longifolia now forms 
the genus Adenosacme of Wallich: all the tetrandrous ones must be likewise ex- 
eluded. Dr Wallich remarks, that most of the species of this genus ** vary consider- 
ably in the figure and size of the leaves, the degree of their pubescence, and in their 
inflorescence; a circumstance which renders their specific discrimination difficult : 
in which we find an additional proof of what we have had occasion to urge more than 
once in this volume, that pubescence and shape of leaves being dependent on adven- 
ous circumstances, afford characters that are frequently o little importance un- 
less supported by others of greater weight. With regard to the species 1n Dr Wal- 
lich's List, we have only ye oj por&mit? of dxnminig a few of them: of d: 
W. lata, Wall. L. n. 6266. b, is certainly not Rond. paniculata, Roxb. (in E.t. 
C kd pancu + t | H h he 
J. mus. tab, 1954); if not a new species (W. budleioides, Wall. mst.) it might © 
i with W. tinctoria (Rondeletia tinctoria, Roxb. 1. c. tab. 1955): W. tinetoriay 
all. L. n. 6269. b, has the anthers too much exserted for the true plant; We H9 
pose to call it. W. Wallichii: W. cinerea, Wall. L. n. 6268 (Rondeletia cinerea, Watt)» 
does not appear to be distinguishable as a species from W. easerta: W. berula, 
DC., is described with the stigma clavate, but it is composed of two thickish plates 
or lobes as in the other species; does this really differ from WW. pendula, which Dr 
Wallich describes with an entire stigma ? j 
1238. (1) W. exserta (DC.:) arboreous, with villous young branches : 
leaves petioled, oblong-lanceolate, upper side pubescent, under velvetty, glau- 
cous: stipules acute, densely pubescent, the upper part recurved, reniform : 
branches of the panicle villous, spreading: flowers more or less crowded: 
calyx hoary : corolla scarcely pubescent ; tube very short, scarcely exceeding 
the limb of the calyx, somewhat campanulate ; divisions of the limb recurve®: 
filaments nearly as long as the segments of the corolla: capsule villous.— 
DC. prod. 4. p. 411 ; Wall. L. n. 6267.—Rondeletia exserta, Row. ff. Iud. 1. 
p. 523; (ed. Wall.) 2. p. 135; in E. I. C. mus. tab. 1363.—R, thrysiflora 
Heyne in Roth, nov. sp. p. 141 ; Spr. syst. 1. p. 708.—R. Oryssensis, Roth, l. €- 
p. 142 ; Spr. l. c.—R. Heynei, Roem. and Schult. syst. 5. p. 234 
We have already remarked that W. cinerea is too closely allied to this spe- - 
cies ; the only difference we know of between the two is, that in W. cinerea 
the stipules are usually blunt ; but we have also observed them mucronate si 
specimens from Dr Wallich himself. We also suspect W. prowima, DC», 
Rond, proxima, Don, to be quite the same, or at most a mere variation 
- 
