Reprinted from The Philippine Journal of Science. 

 Section C, Vol. II, No. 2, April, 1907. 



- THE OCCURRENCE OF ANTIARIS IN THE PHILIPPINES. 



By Elmer D. Merrill. 



{From the botanical section of the Biolor/ical Lahoralory, Bureau of Science.) 



ANTIARIS Lescli. 



Antiaris toxicaria (I'eis.) Lesclien. in Ann. Mus. Paris, 16 (1810) 478. t. 22; 

 lilunic, Huniphia, 1 (1835) 56. t. 22, 23; Benn. PI. Jav. Rar. (1838-1852) 

 52. t. 13; Miq. Fl. Ind. Bat. 1 - (1859) 291; Hook. f. Fl. Brit. Ind. 5 (1888) 

 537; F. Vill. Nov. App. (1883) 202. 



MiNDORO, Bulalacao (1551 Berrnejos) Augiist 27, 1906. V., Salogon; T., 

 Dalit. 



This interesting species was first called to our attention by the Honorable 

 Dean C. Worcester, Secretary of the Interior of the Government of the Philip- 

 pine Islands, who brought from Bulalacao early in the year 1906, a small 

 quantity of a substance used by the natives in that vicinity for poisoning arrows, 

 but without botanical material by which the species yielding the product could 

 be identified. As Dr. R. F. Bacon of the Bureau of Science had undertaken the 

 chemical examination of the diflferent arrow poisons vised by the natives of the 

 Philippines, a native collector was sent to Bulalacao with instructions to secure 

 a quantity of the poison as well as botanical specimens from the tree yielding 

 the product. Although the material secured was without fruit or flowers, a 

 careful examination of it leads me to conclude that it is identical with Antiaris 

 toxicaria, while Dr. Bacon informs me that a chemical examination of the 

 poison shows it to be identical with that yielded by this species. 



Miguel^ credits the species to the Philippines, citing Camell for authority 

 for its occurrence here. That the species was known from the Philippines over 

 two hundred years ago, and that from Camell's time up to the year 1906 this 

 much discussed and well known plant had not been rediscovered in the Archipel- 

 ago, is at least interesting. 



F.-Villar includes the species in his Novissime Appendix, citing Miguel and 

 Camell for authority for its occurrence in the Philippines, but stating that he 

 had not seen specimens. 



Camell ^ states the following regarding this plant, under his "De guihusdam 

 Arhoribus Venenatis :" 



"1. Ipo, sen Hypo arbor est mediocris, folio parvo, & obscurfe virenti, quae 

 tam malignae, & nocivae est qualitatis, ut omne vivens umbra sua interimat, 

 unde narrant in circuitu, & umbrae distinctu plurima ossium, mortuoruni 

 hominum, anamaliumve videri. C'ircumvicinas etiani plantas enecat, & avos 

 insidentes interficere ferunt, si Nucus Vomicae Igasur, plantain non invenerint, 

 qua reperta vita quidem donantur, & servantur, sed defluvium patiuntur plu- 

 marum. Antonius Molero mihi retulit, post iter per Sylvosam viam, passuni 



Un. Ind. Bat. 1 = (1859) 292. 



2 J. Eay: Hist. Plant. 3 (1704) App. 87. 



Ill 



