NKW OR NOTEWORTHY PHILIPPINE PLANTS, VII. 287 



EHAMNACEJ5. 



VENTILAGO (^aertn. 



Ventilago dichotoma (Blanco) Meiv. in Govt. Lab. Piil)]. (Philip.) 27 

 (1905) 32, exel. syn. T. Inzoniensis Vid. 



Enrila dichotoma Blanco Fl. Filip. (1837) 709. 



Ventilago monoica Blanco 1. e. ed. 2 (1845) 124; ed. 3, 1:223. 



Ventilago maderaspatana F.-Vill. Nov. App. (1880) 48, ex syn. Blanco, non 

 Gaertn. 

 . Kurrimia gracilis Vid. Rev. PI. Vase. Filip. (1880) 89. 



Ventilago gracilis Merr. & Rolfe in Philip. Journ. Sci. 3 (1908) Bot. 110. 



Luzon, Province of Rizal, San Mateo, Vidal 1122 in 'Herb. Kew., type of 

 Kurrimia gracilis Vid.; Bosoboso, Fof. Bur. 3073 Aherii's collector, ^lay, 1903, 

 in flower; Pilea, Bur. Sci. 3303 Ramos, June, 1907, in fruit; Montalban, Lohcr 

 ^685, 4686, in Herb. Kew. sub Galearia. 



Endemic. 



The type of Blanco's new genus and species, Enrila dichotoma, was from Sail 

 Mateo, Province of Rizal, Luzon, and all the above specimens are from the same 

 province, and agree with his description. The genus Enrila was placed b.y 

 Bentham in the Anacardiaceae, as a doubtful one, but Blanco properly localized 

 it, in the second edition of his Flora de Filipinas, although in reducing Enrila to 

 Ventilago, he changed the specific name. It was reduced by F.-Villar to Ven- 

 tilago maderaspatana Gaertn., which is certainly an error. Having only flowering 

 specimens, Vidal redescribed the species as Kurrimia gracilis, of the Celastraceae, 

 but failed to connect Blanco's species with it, and later in looking over Vidal's 

 specimens in the Kew Herbarium, Mr. Rolfe and myself found Vidal's type to 

 be a Ventilago, rather than a Kurrimia, and accordingly transferred the species 

 to the former genus. In making the original transfer of Ventilago dichotoma, 

 I cited as a synonym, Ventilago luzoniensis Vid., but this is an error, as an exami- 

 nation of Vidal's type shows that this species is quite distinct from the one here 

 considered, and one to which Blanco's description does not appl,y. 



Ventilago oblongifolia Blume Bijdr. (1826) 1144; Miq. Fl. Ind. Bat. V 

 (1855) 640. 



Palawan, Puerto Princesa, Bur. Sci. 264 Bermejos, December, 1905. Luzon, 

 Province of Bulacan, near Norzagaray^ Yoder 105, December, 1906. 



New to the Philippines; previoush^ reported only from Java. 



Ventilago luzoniensis Vid. Rev. PI. Vase. Filip. (1886) 90. 

 T. maderaspatana Vid. Sinopsis Atlas (1883) t. 32, f. D., non Gaertn. 

 Luzon, Province of Tarlac, La Paz, Vidal 198, in Herb. Kew. 

 This endemic species somewhat resembles the preceding one, but is distinguish- 

 able by its much smaller leaves. 



Ventilago lucens Miq. Fl. Ind. Bat. Suppl. (1860) 330. 



Luzon, Province of Tayabas (Principe), Baler, Merrill llOo, August, 1902. 



This species has previously not been reported from the Philippines, but so far 

 as I can determine at present the specimens well represent Miquel's species, 

 although I have not seen the type. King' states that Ventilago lucens Miq. 

 must be very near, if not identical with V. leiocarpa Benth., but the specimen 

 above referred to V. htcens Miq., is quite distinct from material in our herbarium 

 from Hongkong and from Singapore, supposedly representing Bentham's species. 



Sumatra. 



». Journ. As. Soc. Beng. 65- (1896) 380. 



