326 A NATURALIST IN THE PACIFIC CHAP. 



on the fruits and seeds of two species it was evident that they 

 possessed little or no capacity for dispersal by the currents. We 

 look, therefore, to the birds, and in this connection it is of interest 

 to note that this genus is included amongst those known to be 

 dispersed by birds in the Pacific, some of the fruits having been 

 found in the crops of fruit-pigeons shot by Prof. Moseley in the 

 Admiralty Islands (JBot. Ckall. Exped^ Introd. 46 ; iv. 308). 



PRITCHARDIA (Palmaceae). 



This genus of Fan Palms supplies an instructive lesson for the 

 student of plant-distribution, more especially with reference to the 

 loss of the endemic reputation of a genus. Regarded by the 

 earlier botanists who visited the Pacific as identical with the 

 familiar Asiatic Talipot Palm (Corypha umbraculifera), the Fan 

 Palms of this region, as represented in Fiji and Hawaii, were 

 subsequently placed by Seemann and Wendland in a new genus 

 restricted to Polynesia and named after a former British Consul in 

 Fiji. Since that time it has lost its reputation as a peculiarly 

 Pacific genus, since a species (Pritchardia filifera) has been found 

 lingering in a few valleys in Arizona, where it enjoys the distinc- 

 tion of being the most northerly in station of all the world's palms 

 (Linden in Illustr. Hort. vol. 24, 1876-77). It would thus appear 

 that the Pacific islands have derived this genus of palms from the 

 western part of North America, but the whole question is beset 

 with many difficulties, and not the least is that connected with the 

 confusion that seems to reign in several cases as regards the 

 allocation and identity of the species. 



Six species are named in the Index Kewensis, viz. : Pritchardia 

 macrocarpa, restricted to Hawaii ; P. martii and P. gaudichaudii, of 

 the Pacific islands ; P. pacifica, assigned to Fiji ; P. vuylstekeana, 

 from the Paumotus ; and P. filifera, from the west side of North 

 America. Though it is sometimes difficult to reconcile this 

 account of the distribution of the genus in the Pacific with views 

 held by other botanists, it offers the safest basis for the future 

 investigation of the subject. It would be, however, necessary 

 to remember that Pritchardia gaudichaudii and P. martii are 

 regarded by Hillebrand as peculiar to the Hawaiian Islands, 

 and that the exact locality of the Paumotu species is not very 

 definitely settled, if it depends on the remarks made on this species 

 in the Gardeners' Chronicle for 1883. No mention is indeed made 

 by Drake del Castillo of any Tahitian or Paumotuan species. 



