84 Oranges and Lemons of India. 



having a totally different foliage. Again, the descrip- 

 tion of Limo ventricosus corresponds with fig. i, and 

 not with fig. 2, as given in the Explicatio. Buchanan 

 Hamilton, in the copy referred to, had noticed this 

 mistake, and on the back of the plate wrote the figures 

 with the right names they ought to have borne, ac- 

 cording to the descriptions, viz.: 



Fig. i. Limo ventricosus. 



Fig. 2. Limo tiiberosus martinicus. 



The latter has the naked petiole of a lemon, and the 

 former the large-winged petiole of the lima. 



There is yet, I think, another mistake in this same 

 plate. The Explicatio says, fig. 3 is a branch of the 

 limo feriis. Now limo ferns appears to be altogether 

 a different thing, and fig. 3, in my opinion, is no other 

 than a smooth form of fig. i.* Their foliage is 

 identical, while the limo ferus is different both in fruit 

 and foliage (?). I have given an outline of the latter in 

 pi. 226, fig. c, and in Rumphius it is shown more com- 

 pletely in tab. 28, vol. ii. 



I also found that in Rumphius there was a series of 

 citrus with large-winged petioles. It appeared to me 

 probable that they were all more or less connected with 

 Limo ventricosus. Some had less tubercled exteriors, 

 and some very small fruit, even smaller than that of 

 the true lime, yet retaining their large-winged petioles. 

 Outlines of these are shown in the accompanying 

 Atlas in pi. 226, fig. b, Limo agrestis ; pi. 226, fig. c, 

 Limo feriis ; pi. 227, figs, c c, Limonelhts aurarius. 

 Finally, we have in pi. 227, fig. , the Limo temns 

 (shown in Rumphius on tab. 29, vol. ii.). This is the 

 most important of all. It corresponds both in picture 

 and description with the true lime of Ceylon, India, and 



* Vide pi. 227, fig. a. 



