OWN 



181 



F. cremdata, Hassk. Cat. Hort. Bot. Bogor. p. 76 ; Miq. Fl. Ind. Bat. i. pt. 2. 321. A species founded on s 



leaf-twig. I do not know what it may D3. 



F. cuneata, Wall. Cat. 4534, is, as I am informed by Mr. W. B. Hemsley, no Fious at all, but Erythrorylon 



Burmanicum, Griff. 



F. dcemonum, Zoll. et Mor. Syst. Verz. p. 77, is probably, as Miquel suggests, F. 

 F. denticula'a, Ham. in Trans. Linn. Soc. xv. 145, is referred by Miqu 



obscura, Bl. 



1, and probably rightly, to 



F. quercifolia, Eoxb 



F. dichrotrix, Miq. Of this there is a very poor specimen at Utrecht. It is F. obscura, Bl. 



F. (sub. Urostig.) Diepenhorsiii, Miq. Fl. Ind. Bat. Suppl. 439, is founded ou a leaf specimen from Sumatra. 



F. diformis, Lamk. Enc. ii. 499. Lamark's description is too meagre to admit of certainty as to what plant 



he meant. I have followed Mr. Bentham in treating this as probably the same as F. yibbom, 



Blume ; see p. 5. 



F. dimidiata, Wall. Cat. 4575, is probably F. aurantiaca, Griff. The only specimens are leafy shoots. 



F. discolor, Miq. Ann. Mus. Lugd. Bat. iii. 221, 291. I have seen no specimen of this; but from Miquel's 



description, I should think it. is probably referable to either F.fulva, Reinw., or F. toxicaria, Liun. 



F. drupacea, Thunbg. Ficus No. 11. I can make nothing of this. 



F. eilipsoidea, Miq. Ann. Mus. Lugd. Bat. iii. 230, 295. The type of this in the Utrecht Herbarium appears 



to me to be simply F. subulata, Bl. ; and a specimen at Kew, named elliptoidea by M .'quel's own 

 hand, is undoubtedly the same as the type of trcmafocarpa, Miq., which is the same as F. 

 Bccaisneana, Miq. F. eilipsoidea as a species therefore falls to tlie ground. 



F. Emodi Wall. Cat. 4515. This is represented in the Wallichian collections by leaf specimens said to 



have come from Gossainthan, a mountain in Nepal. The leaves of these are like those of F. Icris, 

 Bl., near which this plant has been put by Miquel (Lond. Joum. Bot. vii. 73; Arm Mus. Lugd. 

 Bat. iii. 278, 293), but they are more cordate at the base and have much longer petioles. In my 

 opinion they more resemble the leaves of F. Amottiana, Miq., which is not, however, a Himalayan 

 plant. But Wallich's localities are not always to be depended upon ; and his No. 4515 may have 

 been attributed to Gossainthan through some confusion or misplacement of tickets. 



F. erythrosperma, Miq. in Ann. Mus. Lugd. Bat. iii. 226, 293. From Miquel's description of this, and from 



the specimens in the Utrecht Herbarium, named by himself and which agree with his published 

 description, I should be inclined to regard this as a form of F. lepfocarpa, Steud. (= rawenfacen, 

 Eoxb.), from the typical form of which it appears to differ only in having obovate instead of ovato 

 leaves. ' The specimens at Kew and Leiden bearing this name (written also by Miquel's hand) do not 

 agree with his description, and they clearly belong to some other species ; but the materials are too 



imperfect for accurate determination. 

 Miq. (sub. UrosL) Fl. Ind. Bat. i. pt. 2. 350; Miq. in Ann. Mus. Lugd. Bat. iii. 386, 



A species from Western Java. Miquel's type of this is at Utrecht, and consists of three leaves, which 



hardly have been collected from the same plant. This species is not represented in Kew, 



Leiden, Calcutta, nor in M. deCandolle's Herbarium at Geneva. 

 F fallax, Miq. Fl. Ind. Bat. i. pt. 2. 308 ; Ann. Mus. Lugd. Bat. iii. 292. The type of this in the Utre,ht 



Herbarium appears to be either a form of F. cuspidata, Reinw., or of F irregularis, Miq. 

 F. filiformis, Bl. Bijdr. 442. Described without receptacles: probably founded on a young shoot of some 



scandent species. I have seen no specimen. 

 F Gasparrinmna, Miq in Lond. Jonrn. Bot. vii. 436 ; Ann. Mus. Lugd. Bat. iii. 294 I have seen odIj 



one specimen of this, and it is too imperfect to be dealt with satisfactorily. The species, if it be 



one, is evidently near F. Silhetensis, Miq., and F erecta, Thunbg. 

 F glomerata (not of Eoxb.), Wall. Cat. 450 10 in part m F saemocarpa, Miq. 



F. gracilis, Wall. Cat. 4572, is not a Ficus. 



F arhea Wall. Cat. 4544. All the specimens I have seen consist of twigs without leaves or 



F, 



can 





ptacles 



F. 



en,, Miq ' Ann. Mus. Lugd. Bat. iii. 227, 294. From Borneo and doubtfully from Amho 

 and Ceram. I have seen no specimen. From the description, this must be either F. lanau,, Bl 

 F. ramtntacea, Boxb., or near these. 





