iest specific name ‘‘diversifolia’’ on account of the earl- 
ier Brachychiton diversifolius R. Br. Robert Brown's 
binomial undoubtedly refers, as pointed out by Bentham 
(Fl. Austral. 1 (1886) 280) to Sterculia caudata Heward 
in Herb. Cunn. 
Consequently the oldest available specific name is 
‘‘nopulnea’’ based on Poecilodermis populnea Schott & 
Endl. and the correct combination is Brachychiton pop- 
ulneus (Schott & Endl.) R. Br. 
CALADIUM Ventenat, Deser. Pl. Nouv. Jard. 
Cels, livr. 3 (1801) t. 80 and in Roem. Archiv. Bot. 2 
(1801) 847. 
In discussing this genus, W. F. Wight (in Safford 
in Contrib. U.S. Nat. Herb. 9 (1905) 208) advanced the 
idea that Caladium Vent. applied to the genus com- 
monly known as Colocasia Schott. The basis of his 
argument was that Ventenat drew his generic name from 
Rumphius who used this name for certain species of 
Arum. ‘This is undoubtedly true. Starting with this 
premise, Wight argues that the only species common to 
both Rumphius and Ventenat is ‘‘esculentum’’, which 
is likewise the fact. 
Granted the truth of both statements, we cannot 
agree with Wight’s deduction that Caladium Vent. 
must apply to that part of the material included in the 
genus typified by ‘‘esculentum’’. In the first place, from 
the point of view of Ventenat’s genus the governing 
factor is what did he describe, not the source from which 
he drew the generic name. . The generic description 
seems broad enough to cover both types of plants in- 
cluded in his subsequent list of species composing the 
genus. However, the species to which he refers through- 
out the text and which he illustrates is C. bicolor and 
no mention of ‘‘esculentum’’ is made until at the end he 
sums up those species of Arum which he believes belong 
3 
