12 WILSON EXPEDITION TO CHINA 



forests, alt. 1300 m., A. Henry (No. 12902"; large climber); Mengtsze, forests, 

 alt. 1800 m., A. Henry (No. 11237; large climber, green flowers) . Kwangtung: 

 Hainan, C. Ford (in part, and partly Smilax china Linnaeus). 



25. Smilax stenopetala Gray in Mem. Amer. Acad. n. s. VI. 412 (1859). — 

 Maximowicz in Bull. Acad. Sci. St. Petersbourg, XVI. 169 (1872); in Mel. Biol. 

 VIII. 405 (1872). — A. De Candolle, Monog. Phaner. I. 189 (1878). — Henry in 

 Trans. As. Soc. Jap. XXIV. suppl. 96 (1896). — Wright in Jour. Linn. Soc. 

 XXXVI. 101 (1903). 



Formosa: Bankinsing, A. Henry (Nos. 52, 55, 115, 144); South Cape, A. 

 Henry (No. 284). 



26. Smilax ovalifolia Roxburgh, Hart. Beng. 72 (1814); Fl. Ind. ed. 2, III. 794 

 (1832). — Seemann, Bat. Voy. Herald, 421 (1852-57). — Bentham, Fl. Hongk. 

 370 (1861). — A. De Candolle, Monog. Phaner. I. 199 (1878). — Wright in Jour. 

 Linn. Soc. XXXVI. 100 (1903). 



Smilax prolifera Roxburgh, Fl. Ind. ed. 2, III. 795 (1832). — Kunth, Enum. 

 V. 247 (pro parte) (1850). 



Yunnan: Mengtsze, woods, alt. 1800 m., A. Henry (No. 9415**; flowers green); 

 same locahty, mountains southeast, alt. 2300 m., A. Henry (No. 9225; green fruit, 

 very large chmber); Szemao, forests, alt. 1500 m., A. Henry (No. 12719; large 

 chmber, white flowers.) 



With plenty of material this species may prove a complex of several forms. 



27. Smilax indica Vitman, Summa PI. V. 422, (1879). — A. De Candolle, 

 Monog. Phaner. I. 187 (1878). 



Smilax Hohenackeri Kunth, Enum. V. 240 (1850). 



Yunnan: Mengtsze, alt. 1500 m., A. Henry (No. 11238; large climber, green 

 flowers). 



DOUBTFUL SPECIES. 



The following species reported from China have not been included in this Ust 

 for various reasons, mostly because of insuSicient evidence of their vaUdity. 



S. Davidiana A. De Candolle, Monog. Phaner. 1. 104 (1878). Not seen. 



S. flacdda Wright in Kew Bull. Misc. Inform. 1895, 118. This species is placed 

 by Wright in Eusmilax, but all the material I have seen of Henry's No. 3630, on 

 which the species is based, is strictly herbaceous and closely related to S. herbacea, 

 var. angustata. 



S. laevis, var. ophirensis A. De Candolle fide Wright in Jour. Linn. Soc. XXXVI. 

 99 (1903). A doubtful identification. 



S. cyclophylla Warburg in Bot. Jahrb. XXIX. 257 (1900). This may be S. 

 menispermoidea which is not included by Warburg in his Ust. 



S. cinerea Warburg in Bot. Jahrb. XXIX. 258 (1900). Probably not distinct 

 from S. ocreata De Candolle. 



S. Bockii Warburg in Bot. Jahrb. XXIX. 259 (1900). 



S. Nebelii Gilg in Bot. Jahrb. XXXIV., Beibl. LXXV. 26 (1904). Probably S. 

 Sieboldii Miquel. 



S. Lyi L^veill^ in Fedde Rep. Spec. Nov. VIII. 171 (1910). Probably S. ocreata. 



S. perulata L6veill6 in Fedde Rep. Spec. Nov. IX. 78 (1910). Probably S. 

 ovalifolia Roxburgh. 



Leveill^ and Vaniot in L6veill6, Liliac. etc. Chine, 26-28 (1905) have pubUshed 

 several new names imder this genus, but without sufficient description to allow 

 one to even guess at the synonomy. Their S. ocreata is preoccupied by the S. 



