Mischocarpus. 1295 



sp. ? Turcz. in Bull. Mose. XXXL 1. (1858) 406, in obs. de Schi, subundulata; Cat. 

 Kew. Hb. Griff, etc. (1865) 9, quoad Helfer 982/1!; Vidal, Phanerog. Guming. (1885) 

 66, 105, Cuming n.l734! — Cupania fuscescens Miq. Fl. Ind. Bat. I. 2. (1859) 567, 

 excl., ut videtur, obs. :>>Hujus fere loci Arhor palorum [alba] latifolia [potius >>pari>ifolia<<] 

 Rumph. Hb. Amb. III. (1743) 99 t.65<< [icon rami fructigeri (excl. fig. A), inde minime 

 >>latifolia<<, cujus fructi ignoti dicuntur a Rumphio 99 et cujus nulla illustratio adest, 

 nisi ramulus floriger ad sinistram depictus, uti Blume in Rumphia III. 112 et 167 

 opinatur adjecta interpretatione >> Mischocarpus sp.<<, qui ramulus vero ibid. 149, a 

 Blume cum figura >>Arboris palorum albae parvifoliae t. 65 (excl. fig. A)<< ad Scorodo- 

 dendron pallens Blume (i. e. Lepisanthes pallens Radlk., quae conferenda) recensetur] 

 >>nec non CajuLapeLape altera p. 78 t.50<<, cf. Merrill, Interpr. Rumph. Hb. Amb. (1917) 

 337 quoad t. 65 (excl. fig. A), et 334, quoad t.50, ubi vero nil certi de una et altera 

 additur, potius de illa quaeritur »Lepisanthes sp.?<< (cfr. L. pallens Radlk.), de altera 

 (t.50, quae a Blume quoque 1. c, 167 — perperam ob fructum depictum estipitatum — 

 Mischocarpus sp. dicta fuit) »Evonymus sp.?<<, quod forsan mutandum in »Sarcopteryx 

 sp.<< (cfr. S. squamosa Radlk.), nee non 339 quoad fruct. t.65 sub lit. A depictum, 

 quem Merrill perperam ad Arb. palor. alb. latifoliam, cujus fructus a Rumphio ignoti 

 dicuntur, duxit et in Miquelium nitens ad Mischocarpum fuscescentem Blume recensuit, 

 qui fructus vero, stipite carens, Elattostachyos potius fructum aemulat (cfr. Elatto- 

 stachys verrucosa Radlk.); Walp. Ann. VII. 4. (1869) 625. — Ratonia sp. Turcz. in 

 Bull. Mose. XXXVI. 1. (1863) 587, part., i.e. quoad coli. Cuming n.l456! et 1734! 

 (non 1389!, quae M.sundaicus Blume), emendanda obs. »forte omnes ad Rat. Lessert. 

 s. Mischocarpum sundaicum Blume pertinent<<, et quoad coli. Zollinger n.3266!; Vidal, 

 Phaner. Guming (1885) 66, 105, coli. Guming n.l465! — Mischocarpus sundaicus, non 

 Blume, Zollinger in sched. PL javan. n.3266! ed. Turcz. 1. e. (1863) 587. — Cupania 

 sumatrana, non Miq., Hiern in Hook. f. Fl. Brit. Ind. I. (1875) 678, solummodo quoad' 

 collect. Kurz e Pegu! et Griffith e Tenasserim part., i. e. Distr. Kew. n.987! (nee 989/1! 

 in Hb. Kew. sub Cupania sumatrana quoque milit., quae vero ad Nephelium hypoleucum 

 Kurz reeensend.) excl. reliquis omnibus ad Mischocarpum pentapetalum pertinent. ; Kurz 

 in Journ. As. Soc. Beng. XLIV. 2. (1875) 189 et in Forest Fl. Brit. Burma I. (1877) 

 285!; Vidal, Sinops. (1883) Atlas p. XXI t.34 f. D, c. indie. »Angat, Bulacan«. — 

 Cupania Helferi Hiern 1. c. (1875) 679, coli. Helfer n. 982/1!; Kurz 1. c. (1875) 189 et 

 (1877) 285. — Ratonia sumatrana Kurz, Pegu Report (1875) App. A 38, App. B 40, 

 coli. n.2044! (in Hb. Kew.). — Cupania subundulata Vidal, Phaner. Guming (1885) 6, 

 105, coli. n.507, c. syn. Schleichera subundulata Turcz. — Pedicellia tonkinensis Pierre, 

 Fl. forest. Goehinch. Fase. 21. (1895) in textu ad tab. 323A, coli. Balansa n.3700!, 

 c. obs.: An huc an Pedicellia sundaica — i. e. Mischocarpus sundaicus Blume — eadem 

 ae Pedicellia oppositifolia Lour. ?, »cujus nomen legendum P. oppositifoliolata<< (suppo- 

 sitio non sine veritatis specie et observatione a Loureiro adjecta de affinitate aliqua 

 cum Bursera quodammodo suffulta, attamen incerta, cum nullum speeimen authenticum 

 obvium sit; inde Pedicellia Lour. synonymum dubium Mischocarpi Blume, ut a Blume 

 ipso, habendum, etsi putaveris fructus stipitem repraesentare, quod Loureiro capsulae 

 pedieellum, et arilli calcar, quod pedieellum seminis proprium appellavit). — Pedicellia 

 fuscescens Pierre, 1. c. (1895) in textu ad tab. 32 3 B (coli, nulla iudicata) — Mischo- 

 carpus tonkinensis Radlk. in Engl. u. Prantl, Nat. Pflanzenfam., Nachtr. III. (1907) 

 206; Lecomte, Fl. Indo-Ghine I. (1912) 1029. — ? Mischocarpus sumatranus (non 

 >>Blume<<) Ridley, Fl. Malay Penins. I. (1922) 508, ob fl. 5-petal. huc recensendus? — 

 Vulgo: Kihooöh s. Kihooi sundaice t. Blume I.e., Ki-ho6h Filet, Woordenb. (1876) 

 175, ed. 2. (1888) 171 (ut et Mischoc. sundaicus, Arytera litoralis, Guioa diplopetala et 

 Xerospermum Noronhianum, quod conferend.); Ki-hoe, Ki-tandoek, Ki-tangkir, 

 Pendjalinan Javaner, t. Koord. et Valet. 1. e. (1903, ut Mischoc. sundaicus, Arytera 

 litoralis et Guioa diplopetala); Dapnit Tagalis insular. Philipp, t. Zsehokke in sched.; 

 Baliang-Baliang Luzonensibus in lingua Aeta, i. e. Negrito, t. W. Kobbe in sched.: 



