362 



1848 p. 58). Ivuntli had not then decided to establish his genus 

 nia for those snecies of Dioscorea in which the seeds are 



Hel 



winged only at the top. 



^ 



Mart. (1842), automatically became Helmia mult i flora, Kunth 

 (Enum. vol. v. p. 431), and the name D. multi flora, Presl (1844), 

 onee more became available (Enum. vol. v. p. 333). W lien 

 in 1864 Grisebach pointed out the identity of this Mar- 

 tinique plant with the subject of Plumier's plate he did, 

 however, introduce a minor confusion owing to his having 

 described as D. triphylla, Linn. (Flor. Brit. West IncL p. 587)"" 

 what as regards foliage is Clematis dioica, Linn., and as regards 

 the compound fruiting spikes is I), martin icensis, Spreng. 



So far as may be judged from the specimens preserved in the 

 collections at Kew and the Natural History Museum, London, 

 the plant known as D. martinicenris, Spreng., is confined to the 

 West Indies. It is a member of the section Lychnostemon, and 

 within that section is most nearly allied to I). rneridensis, Kunth,. 

 a species from Colombia with leaves equally closely reticulated 

 ana with the inflorescences similarlv branched. But while so 

 like T). martinicensis , the Colombian plant is readily dis- 

 tinguished from the West Indian one by being everywhere 

 puberulous. Plentiful in Martinique and St. Vincent, T). 

 Martinicensis is equallv abundant in Jamaica. t In Dominica the 



Grisebach's account of D. triphylla is perplexing in other ways ; he 

 states that his conglomerate plant is H naturalised in Jamaica/' There is no 

 such statement on the sheet of March n. 1709, which Grisebach has written 

 up as I). triphylla, Linn. Grisebach's account of the Clematis leaves and of 

 the Dioscorea capsules is accurate ; to what plant the citation " 3 stamens 

 fertile " may apply, is not clear. The citation of the plate of D. triphylla of 

 1793 by Jacquin (Ic. PI. Ear. t. 627) at first suggests that the species 

 Grisebach had in mind was D. triphylla, Linn, of 1754 (Amoen. Acad. vol. iv. 

 131), which is D. hispida, Dennst. (1818), rather than the D. triphylla, Linn, 

 of 1753 (Sp. PI. ed. 1, p. 1032) which, as Linnaeus anticipated when he first 

 published this name, now proves to be only a form of D. pentaphylla, Linn. 

 Against this, however, is the fact that the D. triphylla figured by Jacquin 

 has 6 fertile stamens, and that the good description of the fruit of this 

 species by Gaerhier (Fruct. vol. i. p. 66) does not in the least agree with 

 Grisebach's account of the capsules of the West Indian plant. The other 

 D. triphylla, Linn., which is but a form of D. pentaphylla, has, it is true, only 

 3 fertile stamens. But in this case again the fruits are quite unlike those 

 described by Grisebach. Moreover, neither the D. triphylla, Linn, of 1754, 

 nor the D. triphylla, Linn, of 1753, are naturalised in Jamaica. The only 

 D. triphylla of which this might perhaps be said, is the D. triphylla 

 described by Poiret in 1813 (Encyc. Meth. 8-uppL vol. iii. p. 140). The 

 name D. triphylla, Poir., however, is merely a typographical error for D. 

 trijida, Linn, f., a species described in 1781 by the younger Linnaeus (Suppl. 



PI. p. 427 — not p. 224 as stated by Poiret, I.e.) from a specimen collected 

 by Allamand in Surinam, which still exists in the Linnean herbarium. This 

 species was described again in 1789 by Lamarck as D. triloha (Encyc. Meth. 

 vol. hi. p. 234), and once more in 1806 by Willdenotf.as D. brasiliensis (Sp. 

 Pled. WiUd. vol.iv. p. 791). 



t Though so common in Jamaica the species is not dealt with by Sloane. 

 It is the Wild Yam of P. Browne (\ r at. Hist. Jam. p. 360) who adverts to its 

 relatively large capsules, as compared with those of the Yam (D. alaia 

 Linn.) and the Negro Yam (D. caye.umsis, Lamk), the only other species 

 which Browne deals with. Browne cites under it Dioscorea foliis cordatis 

 cauls laevi of the Hortus Gliffortianus (D. sativa, Linn.), but by inadvertence 

 cites also the Fegoyirum scan lens sen voluhilis nigra majus of Sloane (Gat. 

 46: Nut. Eist. Jam. vol. i. p. 131, t. 90, fig. 1) which is Anredera scandals* 

 Moq. (Grisebach, Flor. Brit. Wm*. Ind. p. 60). 



