809 



or in different genera. At^suming tliat in most cases F.-Villar\s identifi- 

 cations were correct, I have rednced many of his species in accordance 

 with standard works, cxchiding those whicli he credited to tlie Philippines 

 and wliich liave never l)een collected in the Arcliipelago, and which are 

 not to l)e expected in these Islands. His list was compiled from such 

 works as Kunth's ''Enumeratio Plantarnm," Steudel's "Synopsis," and 

 ^liquel's "Florae Indiae Batavae," including such plants as were credited 

 to the I'hili lupines in those works and such others as F.-Villar thought 

 should grow in the Philippines. Many of the admitted species are 

 followed hy the letters "v. v. sp.," meaning that he had seen living 

 specimens. It is doul)tful if F.-Villar's heri)arium contained more than 

 a very small ])erceiitage of the sp&cies enumerated in the "Novissima 

 Appendix," hut as his herharium, complete or incomplete, has heen 

 destroyed,- we can not he certain as to just what plants F.-Villar had in 

 mind, and in may cases can only surmise what they might have heen. 

 F.-Villar also perpetuated the errors of Cavanilles, Lagasca, and Presl 

 in crediting to the Philippines a numher of American species erroneously 

 descrihed hy those authors as Philippine, the mistake persisting in the 

 works of Kunth, Steudel, and Miquel, cited ahove. In 1885, Vidal 

 enumerated 71 species of Philippine Grammecp in his "Phanerogamae 

 Cumingianae Philip])inarum,'' and in 1880, 72 in his "Revision de Plan- 

 tas Vasculares Filipinas," while aljout the same numher is included by 

 Ceron in his "Catalogo de las plantas del Herbario" (Manila, 1892). In 

 1904 Mez and Pilger mentioned 107 species and varieties in Perkins's 

 "Fragmenta Florae Philippinae," based for most part on my earlier 

 collections. In 1905 Usteri enumerated 71 species of Philippine grasses 

 in his "Beitrage zur Kenntnis der Philippinen und ihrer Vegetation," 

 based on material collected by himself for the greater part in the Island 

 of Ncgros. Two papers entitled "Notes on Philippine Graminege" have 

 been published by Hackel.^ 



So far as genera are concerned I have followed Hackel * in arrange- 

 ment and nomenclature rather closely, but have retained as genera some 

 groups treated by him as subgenera. In accordance with the action of the 

 Vienna Botanical Congress, I have used RottboeUia L. f., in place of 

 Manisuris Sw. ; Zoisia Willd., for Osterdammia Neck. ; Leersia Sw., for 

 Hotrudocenchrus Mieg., and Cynodon Pers., in place of Capriola Adans. 

 Following the spirit of tliis same Congress, I have retained Setaria 

 Beauv., for GhaetocMoa Scribn.. and in retaining Digitaria as a genus, 

 I have accepted that name in place of Synthcrisma Walt. 



I have followed Hackel's monograph closely as to generic limits in 



= Merrill: Bull. Bureau Af/r., Manila (1903), 3, 34. 



^ Puhlications of the Bureau of Government Lahora lories, Manila (1905), No. 

 35, 79-82. Phil. Journ. Sci. 1 (1006) Snppl., 263-269. 

 *Engl. nnd Prantl : N<if. I'/laiizdifam. II. 2, 1-79. 



