96 



RUMPHIUS'S HERBARIUM AMBOINENSE 



R. & S. and E. plumosa Link. Poa tenella Linn, was based on 

 specimens from India and is identical with Poa amabilis Linn. ; 

 see Munro in Journ. Linn. Soc. Bot. 6 (1862) 43. It is to be 

 noted that in transferring the Linnean specific name to Eragros- 

 tis, as E. amabilis, Wight and Arnott describe a form that is 

 totally distinct from Poa amabilis Linn, and is Eragrostis unio- 

 loides Nees. The specific name amabilis manifestly belongs 

 with the plant originally described by Linnaeus, not with Era- 

 grostis unioloides Nees. 



BAMBUSEAE 



Under the names Arundo and Arundarbor, Rumphius has 

 described a number of species and forms of bamboo, which have 

 been very imperfectly understood by later authors, although 

 many species have been based, wholly or in part, on Rumphius's 

 descriptions. These numerous species, chiefly proposed by 

 Loureiro, Roemer and Schultes, and Miquel, have remained 

 doubtful, almost without exception, to the present time. The 

 Amboinian material presents four distinct species, three of which 

 were described by Rumphius, and this material has enabled me 

 to solve several problems in synonymy and definitely to 

 determine the status of a number of specific names in various 

 genera that have been based on Rumphius. The others have 

 been interpreted from the data given by Rumphius, but much 

 field work is necessary before a sufficient amount of data is 

 available properly to interpret the numerous forms named by 

 Rumphius. In this connection it is to be noted that it has 

 been possible definitely to determine the status of every species 

 of bamboo described by Blanco from the Philippines, a total 

 of eight, from field work in connection with Blanco's descriptions 

 and the native names cited by him; yet Blanco's descriptions, 

 on the average, are decidedly inferior to those of Rumphius. 

 Up to 1900 not one of Blanco's species had been definitely placed, 

 those that were considered at all appeared in literature as 

 species of doubtful status. It> is confidently expected that the 

 status of most of the species based on Rumphius can be definitely 

 settled by following the policy adopted in the Philippines in 

 working out the identity of Blanco's species. The specimens 

 cited below, with the exception of Bambusa spinosa Roxb., of 

 which there were no duplicates, have been critically examined 

 by Mr. J. Sykes Gamble, to whom I am under obligations for 

 his valuable notes, both in connection with the identity of the 

 forms with the Rumphian descriptions and with the names in 

 current use for the several species. 



