14 F. A. G. MIQUEL, ANALECTA BOTANICA INDICA. 
lium partium numero quinario hanc cum paucis aliis capensibus differre, nec tamen 
ab illis separandam esse, monuit. 
Indefessus G. GArDNeR, cui MeisNERi commentatio incognita fuisse videtur, a. 1846 
de Gnidiis indieis doctas observationes edidit, eandem Heyneanam stirpem etiam 
Gnidiae eriocephalae titulo enumeravit, et eum als pentameris indicis speciebus ad 
Gnidiae sectionem seu subgenus, Dingia, retulit, quam Meisner jam a 1840 Pentameram 
vocaverat. GARDNERUM etiam nequaquam has a reliquis separare voluisse, sequentia 
declarant : » Some (inquit) very interesting links connecting the Flora of Western In- 
dia with that of Southern Africa have lately been made known bij Dr. Wicur. Thus 
in the last part of his »Icones Plantarum” (Vol. HI, 4) he has published drawings 
and descriptions of a species of Vogelia and of Apodytes, both African genera hitherto 
unknown in India. This connection will be farther illustrated by the present article. 
All the hitherto published species of Gnidia are natives of South-Africa, but I have 
now to make known three Indian species, one of which is peculiar to Ceylon, ano- 
ther to the Neilgherry mountains, and a third common to both countries. One of 
them has long been known to Botanists by the name of Daphne eriocephala, that being 
the appellation given to it by Dr. Warrrca in his Catalogue, but so far as Ì am 
aware, no description of it, or of any of the others, has yet been published. Accor- 
ding to Warricu the same plant has been referred by Heyne to Lachnaea, butit, as well 
as the other two, differs from both these genera in having faucial scales. With Gnidia, 
to which IL now refer them, they agree in every thing except the number of the 
parts of the flower, the African species being tetramerous, while the Indian ones 
are pentamerous. This, however, is not of suffieient importance to exclude them 
from the genus, of which they- will-form- a-seetion” etc. (Contributions towards a 
Flora of Ceylon, seorsim impr. 1846, 15 seq.). Praeter G. eriocephalam adhuc Gnid. 
insularem et sisparensem eo loco proposuit. 
Horam auctorum sententiam haud secutus est cl, Drcaisse, quum in JACQEMONTI 
ltinere (Vol. IV, 147) novas species enumerans, Gnidias pentameras omnes Lasio- 
siphonis nomine tanquam peculiare genus proponeret. Num partium floralium nu- 
mero diverso tale pondus tribuendum sit, ut exinde species habitu consimiles et 
eadem florum fructuumque structura tetrameris areto connubio conjunctas separare 
oporteat, mihi vix satis persuasum est, nee vaginutae hypogynae, in Lasiosiphone 
observatae, a MersNero et GARDNERO praetervisae vel in eorum speciebus deficienti, or- 
gano videlicet valde rudimentario, valorem genericum jam nunc concederem, quum 
ejus in reliquis Gnidiis ratio nondum satis explorata sit. Nihilominus autem Zasiosiphonis 
genus nunc servandum videtur, quum charactere artificiali facili negotio distingui posset. 
ei DRE 
