1893.] G. King — Materials for a Flora of the Malayan Peninsula. 101 



tea odorata. This plant has been named Synaptea grandiflora by Kurz, 

 ( Journ. A.S., Beng\, 1870, 2, 65), and Anisoptera odorata Kurz, (For. Plor. 

 Burro. I, 112), while Dyer has identified it with Hopea grandiflora, Wall, 

 Cat. 958, and reduced it to Vatica grandiflora (F.B.I., i., 301). 



The characters of the genus Synaptea, as given by its author, are 

 practically those of Vatica, Linnaeus (Mantissa II., p. 152-3, No. 

 1311), except that, whereas in the Linnaean description nothing is 

 said about the fruit or its relation to the calyx, Griffith distinctly 

 explains that he has given the name Synaptea because the ovary is 

 adnate to the calyx. He does not say to what extent adnate, but, 

 in fruiting specimens of his Synaptea odorata, the adhesion extends to 

 the lower part only. In the " Mantissa " of Linnaeus, only one species 

 of Vatica is described, viz., V. chinensis ; and of the specimen thus 

 named in the Linnasan Herbarium, Sir J. G-. Smith publishes a figure 

 (Smith Ic, ined., t. 36.). This figure however does not show clearly 

 whether the base of the ovary is, or is not, adherent to the calyx, 

 and the fruit is not figured at all. A reference to Linnaeus' speci- 

 men ought to settle what V. chinensis really is ; but unfortunately 

 it has not settled it. I have not myself examined the actual Lin- 

 nasan specimen ; but the opinions of botanists who have examined 

 it vary as to its identity. The plant is generally admitted not to 

 be of Chinese origin, for no Dipterocai'p is known to inhabit 

 China. "Wight and Arnot are of opinion (Prod. 84) that Vatica 

 chinensis is the same as Vatica laccifera, W. A. (Shorea Talura, 

 Roxb.— fide Dyer). Alph. De Candolle (Prod. XVI., 2, p. 619) keeps up 

 the species V. chinensis, while Dyer (Fl. Br. Ind., I, 302) reduces it to 

 Vatica Boxburghiana, Blume (Mus. Bot. Lugd. Bat. II, 31. t. 7.), 

 Blume's Vatica Boxburghiana, being, as the citations and figure given 

 by that author show, the Valeria Boxburghiana of Wight's Illustrations, 

 p. 87, and Icones t. 26. It cannot be demonstrated, therefore, either from 

 Linnaeus' description or specimen, or from Smith's figure of the latter, 

 whether Linnaeus intended his genus Vatica to include only plants with 

 the ovary and fruit free from the calyx, or whether plants in which 

 there is such partial adhesion might not also be admitted. If the 

 latter were the case there would be no occasion to keep up the genus 

 Synaptea. This is the view adopted by Messrs. Hooker and Bentham, 

 who remark of Synaptea, " ex descriptione auctoris verisimiliter ad 

 Vaticam referenda est." This view is also adopted by Dyer, in " Hooker's 

 Flora of British India," where he reduces Synaptea odorata, Griff., to the 

 genus Vatica, Section Eu-Vatica. This view is also to a certain extent 

 adopted by Burck who (Ann. Jard. Bot. Buitenzorg) makes Synaptea 

 a section of Vatica, characterised by having the lobes of the fruiting 



