260 Philippine Journal of Science 1919 



2^71, March, 1918; Ukantin, Hongkong Herbarium 10918, dis- 

 tributed as Randia densiflora Benth. 



This species is manifestly allied to Randia racemosa (Cav.) 

 F.-Vill. (iv. densiflora Benth.), from which it is easily distin- 

 guished by its indumentum. 



COMPOSITAE 



GYNURA Cassini 



GYNURA SEGETUM (Lour.) comb. nov. 



Cacalia segetum Lour. Fl. Cochinch. (1790) 486, in nota. 

 Cacalia pinnatifida Lour. 1. c. non Linn. 

 Gynura pinnatifida DC. Prodr. 6 (1837) 301. 



Kwangtung Province, Kochow region, Kwong T'am Mountain, 

 To Kang P'eng 2671, March 22, 1919, in a garden, with the 

 local name tung fung ip. 



The type of Loureiro's species was from Canton, where he 

 observed it growing in rice paddies. He records the Cantonese 

 name as cien fan sat. His description applies closely to the 

 specimen cited above. I consider his specific name pinnatifida 

 to be invalidated by the earlier Cacalia pinnatifida Linn., an 

 entirely different species, and hence adopt the casual name 

 published by him: "unde vernaculum nomen Sinense Cacalia 

 Segetum^ 



CROSSOSTEPHIUM Lessing 



CROSSOSTEPHIUM CHINENSE (Linn.) comb. nov. 



Artemisia chinensis Linn. Sp. PL (1753) 649, excl. syn. Gmelin; Lour. 



Fl. Cochinch. (1790) 492. 

 Artemisia judaica Lour. Fl. Cochinch. (1790) 489, non Linn. 

 Crossostephium artemisioides Less, ex Cham. & Schlecht. in Linnaea 

 6 (1831) 220. 



The genus Crossostephium was based on cultivated specimens 

 from Manila and from Canton, the species being widely cul- 

 tivated in Japan, China, the Philippines, and Indo-China. I 

 have seen no specimens from wild plants, although the species 

 is manifestly a native of either China or Japan. It is currently 

 known in Manila, where it is cultivated in pots, as ajenjo, a 

 Spanish name properly belonging to Artemisia. The type of the 

 Linnean species was a specimen collected in China by Lager- 

 stroem, and the Linnean description based on this specimen 

 clearly applies to the species currently known as Crossostephium 

 artemisioides Less. The species is still common in cultivation 

 in Canton. Both of Loureiro's descriptions cited above apply 

 to this species. 



