90 Gr. King — Materials for a Flora of the Malay Peninsula. [No. 1, 



Endlicher placed it next to Orophea from which it is distinguished by its 

 inner row of petals being free and having their apices infiexed in esti- 

 vation, while those of Orophea are clawed, vaulted, attached by their edges, 

 and not infiexed in aestivation. In their Flora Indica, Hooker Alius and 

 Thomson added the species P. ramosissima to the original plant of 

 Endlicher, with a remark to the effect that JJvaria Vogelii H. f. 

 should be included in the genus. Farther they associated Popowia with the 

 genera Orophea, Mitrephora and Goniothalamus in the tribe Mitrephorece. 

 In their Genera Plantarum, Mr. Bentham and Sir Joseph Hooker take a 

 different view of the position of Popoina and, in the arrangement adopt- 

 ed in that great work, Popotoia is put amongst the Unoneae ; Orophea 

 is relegated to the tribe Miliuseae ; while Goniothalamus and Mitrephora 

 are retained side by side in the tribe Mitrephoreae. Now the character 

 of the tribe Unoneae is : — " petals flat, slightly unequal, or those of the 

 inner row smaller than those of the outer, or absent," while in several of 

 the Popowias, e. g., P. pisocarpa, P. ramosissima the inner petals are longer 

 than the outer. Baillon, whose arrangement of tribes differs from that 

 of Messrs. Bentham and Hooker, puts Popowia into Unoneae, leaving 

 Mitrephora and Orophea side by side in his tribe Oxymitreoi 



Dr. Scheffer differs from the opinion of the authors of the Genera 

 Plantarum and of Baillon and rather inclines to that of the authors of 

 the Flora Indica. He points out with much force that the proper place 

 for Popowia is in the tribe characterised by its " outer petals being 

 open, the inner connivent over the andro-gynoecium, erecto-connivent or 

 (•(innate " — that is to say in the tribe Mitrephorece of these authors. The 

 stamens of Popoit'ia present considerable diversity, but on the whole 

 they have the character of those of Uvariae rather than those of Unoneae. 

 As Scheffer remarks, there is little difference between the genera 

 Orophea and Mitrephora except that the outer petals of Mitrephora are 

 usually larger than those of Orophea. And if M. Baillon's plan of re- 

 ducing the number of the genera in Anonaceae were to be carried out, 

 Dr. Scheffer would suggest the union of these two and of Popowia into 

 a single genus, from which would be excluded, however, all the African 

 species. Of this new genus Orophea would be the typical form, and the 

 other two would form sub-genera. 



There is no doubt than in externals many Popoicias are like Oro- 

 pheas, and the non-unguiculate character of the inner petals of Popoivia 

 is x'eally the chief character which separates them. 



I venture to follow Dr. Scheffer and the authors of the Flora Indica 

 in putting Popowia, Orophea ami Mitrephora together in the tribe Mi* 

 trephoreae. 



