CYPERACEAE 



105 



This species is not represented in our Amboina collections, 

 but the Rumphian figure unmistakably represents a plant allied 

 to Eleocharis tuberosa Schultes, which is possibly but a tuber- 

 bearing form of Eleocharis plantaginoidea (Rottb.) W. F. Wight 

 (Scirpus plantaginoides Rottb., Eleocharis plantaginea R. Br., 

 Scirpus plantagineus Retz.). Rumphius's Cyperus dulcis is in 

 part the basis of Burman's Andropogon dulcis, this author also 

 citing a figure in Plukenet. There is no indication that Burman 

 had actual specimens, the Rumphian reference is the first one 

 given, and the specific name is taken from Rumphius ; therefore, 

 I have interpreted Cyperus dulcis as the type. In Index 

 Kewensis Andropogon dulcis Burm. f. is reduced to Sorghum 

 vulgare. The Malayan form very closely approaches the one 

 cultivated in southern China, known in Canton as maa tai, that 

 is, typical Eleocharis tuberosa (Roxb.) Schultes. Loureiro's 

 description of Hippuris indica apparently applies to the wild 

 form of this species, as he describes the tubers as small and 

 pilose; those of maa tai are smooth and from 2.5 to 4.5 cm in 

 diameter. Loureiro quotes Cyperus dulcis Rumph. as a synonym 

 of Hippuris indica Lour. It is to be noted that Eleocharis dulcis 

 Trin. does not appear in Index Kewensis. 



FIMBRISTYLIS Vahl 



FIM BR I STY LIS SET ACE A Benth. in Hook. Lond. Journ. Bot. 2 (1843) 

 239. 



Gramen polytrichum Rumph. Herb. Amb. 6: 17, t. 7, f. 1. 

 Amboina, Koesoekoesoe sereh, Robinson PI. Rumph. Amb. b38, August 

 12, 1913, along roadsides, altitude about 250 meters. 



The figure given by Rumphius presents a good habit sketch 

 that might with almost equal propriety be referred to Fimbri- 

 stylis setacea Benth., to F. polytrichoides R. Br., to F. acuminata 

 Vahl, or to any similar tufted species with slender leafless 

 stems and solitary terminal spikelets. As Fimbristylis setacea 

 Benth. is the only species of this type represented in the Amboina 

 collection, I have interpreted it as Gramen polytrichum Rumph. 

 Linnaeus, through error, reduced it to Eriocaulon setaceum 

 Linn., Amoen. Acad. 4 (1759) 134, Syst. ed. 10 (1759) 880, 

 followed by Loureiro, FT. Cochinch. (1790) 60. Willdenow, 

 Sp. PL 1 (1797) 295, referred it to Scirpus polytrichoides 

 Retz. = Fimbristylis polytrichoides R. Br., which disposition of it 

 has been followed by various authors. There is nothing in 

 the Rumphian description to indicate to which of the species 

 of Fimbristylis discussed above it can be referred; from the 



