PANDANACEAE 



83 



Rumphian figure cannot belong to Pandanus terrestris Warb. 

 according to Rumphius's description, but certainly belongs with 

 Pandanus amboinensis Warb. Hasskarl, Neue Schlussel (1866^ 

 87, has interchanged most of the synonyms cited by him between 

 terrestris I and terrestris II 9 citing the plate, with doubt, under 

 both. The brief description given by Rumphius is the whole 

 basis of Pandanus sylvestris Miq., non Bory, and P. terrestris 

 Warb. The form mentioned by Rumphius as Anassa silvestris 

 is unquestionably a Pandanus and is probably referable here. 

 No data are given, however, by which its exact status can be 

 determined. 



FREYCI N ETI A Gaudichaud 



FREYCI N ETI A FUNICULARIS (Savigny) comb. nov. 



Pandanus funicularis Savigny in Lam. Encycl. 4 (1798) 735 (type!). 



Freycinetia strobilacea Blume Rumphia 1 (1835) 156. 



Pandanus funicularis Rumph. Herb. Amb. 4: 153 t. 82. 

 Amboina, Way tommo, Robinson PI. Rumph. Amb. 29, August 16, 1913, 

 in forests, altitude about 30 meters, locally known as anapur. 



Savigny compiled a description of the species, under the 

 Rumphian binomial, in Lamarck's Encyclopedie 4 (1798) 735, 

 and this manifestly constitutes a valid post-Linnean publication 

 of the binomial. I have accordingly accepted this specific name 

 in place of Blume's. Blume reduced Pandanus funicularis 

 Rumph. to Freycinetia strobilacea Blume in the original descrip- 

 tion of that species, the type being from Amboina. The species 

 is known only from Amboina. 



FREYCINETIA GRAM I N EA Blume Rumphia 1 (1835) 159 (type!). 

 Carex arborea Rumph. Herb. Amb. 6: 21, t. 8, /. 2. 



Not represented in our Amboina collections unless the sterile 

 Rel. Robins. 160 J* is referable here. Carex arborea Rumph. 

 is the whole basis of Freycinetia gmminea Blume and is ap- 

 parently known only from the Rumphian description. Linnaeus, 

 Syst. ed. 10 (1759) 865, erroneously referred t. 8, f. 2, to Schoe- 

 nus secans Linn. =Scleria; but the Rumphian reference is not 

 the type of the species, and the figure intended by Linnaeus was 

 manifestly t. 8, f. 1, which is a Scleria. 



FREYCINETIA sp. 



Adpendix cuscuaria I angustifolia Rumph. Herb. Amb. 5: 488. 



The form described is manifestly some species of Freycinetia. 

 This reduction was suggested by Hasskarl, with doubt, Neue 

 Schlussel (1866) 150. Its further identification is impossible 

 from the meager data given by Rumphius. 



