fragrance. Of the wood, Record (loc. cit.) reported: 
‘Tasteless and generally odorless, sometimes with char- 
acteristic scent of the bark and leaves.’”’ 
The odor of Quararibea is extremely persistent. I have 
had an opportunity to examine several specimens which 
were collected in Mexico by Liebmann in 1841—more 
than acentury ago. The fragrance from these specimens 
is but slightly weaker than that from herbarium material 
collected in the past twenty years. 
Matisia is very closely related to Quararibea. Vege- 
tatively, the two genera have many points of resem- 
blance, although there are rather sharply distinguishing 
differences. The fact that the ovary is rather consistently 
5-locular, however, would seem to indicate a fundamental 
difference between Matisia and the 2- or 4-locular Quar- 
aribea. Furthermore, another conspicuous difference is 
the entire lack in Matisia of the characteristic odor of 
Quararibea. This is true of all of the herbarium speci- 
mens of Matisia which I have had occasion to examine. 
It has been stated that all of the members of the genus 
lack it. Although Baillon did not consider the odor to 
be a character of significance, he made mention of the 
absence of it from his section Matisia of the genus Quar- 
aribea. He wrote (oc. cit. 147): ‘‘Je ne parle pas... 
de l’odeur de Mélitot, mais qui n’a pas, parait-il, été 
constatée dans les Matisia, mais qui pourrait étre plus 
ou moins fugitive ou qui ne serait pas, en tout cas, un 
caractére d’une importance absolue.’’ Similarly, Triana 
and Planchon (in Ann. Sci. Nat. ser. 4, 17 (1862) 824), 
in discussing the fragrance of dried specimens of Myrodia 
Cacao Triana & Planchon, stated that ‘‘e’est l’ordinaire 
pour ce genre, une odeur trés prononcée de Mélitot, 
laquelle manque absolument a tous nos Matisia.”’ 
Record (loc. cit. 15) points out that there are differ- 
ences of a minor nature between the woods of Matisia 
{ 250 | 
