lection and Allen 3049 resemble certain of my specimens 
of H. confusa from along the Rio Negro.’’ In May, 
1947, he annotated two specimens in the Herbarium of 
the Instituto Agrondmico do Norte (16736, 16737) as 
“HL. rigidifolia with influence from H. confusa.’’ It is 
indeed of interest that F’roes 21249 was found growing 
in close proximity to an individual of Hevea rigidifolia 
(F'roes 21253). 
It is suggestive that some relationship may exist be- 
tween Hevea rigidifola and H. nitida. Baldwin (in 
Journ. Hered. 38 (1947) 59) considers Hevea rigidifolia 
“and H. confusa {| H. pauciflora var. coriacea), H. pauci- 
Hora and H. viridis |.H. nitida] to be expressions of the 
same complex.”’” There is not only a similarity in the 
seed, but also the general coriaceous and reclinate condi- 
tion of the leaflets could be interpreted as indicative of 
some degree of affinity. The floral characters of the two 
species, however, do not approach each other in any es- 
sential respect. The flowers of Hevea nitida indicate, in 
my opinion, a very close relationship with HZ. brasiliensis, 
thus removing Hd. nitida from any immediate phylo- 
genetic proximity to A. rigidifolia.” 
The resemblance of the seed of Hevea rigidifolia to 
that of one form of H. brasiliensis of the upper reaches 
of the Solimoes must be interpreted as coincidental. The 
‘‘similarity’’ between the flowers of Hevea rigidifolia 
and AZ, brasiliensis which Mueller-Argoviensis intimated 
when he wrote in the description of the latter: ‘‘facies 
florum ut in A. rigidifolia sed structura diversa’’ is en- 
tirely superficial and, from a phylogenetic point of view, 
probably insignificant. 
There does appear to be a likeness between the nor- 
Baldwin (loc. cit. 59) considers H. pauciflora var. coriacea (H. 
Ore. é ooze ° ee 
confusa) and H. nitida (H. viridis) so closely allied that they “‘may 
eventually be combined.’’ I cannot subscribe to this opinion. 
D128") 
