DIOSCQREACEAE 



145 



common and well-known Tacca pinnatifida Forst. The species 

 was confused by Rumphius with Amorphophallus campanulatus 

 Blume (see p. 127), Tacca phallifera Rumph. being made up 

 of Tacca pinnatifida Forst. with the inflorescence of Amorpho- 

 phallus campanulatus Blume, which was described by Rumphius 

 as Taccae fungus. Tacca sativa Rumph., I. c. 5 : 324, is also 

 apparently a mixture of Tacca pinnatifida Forst. and Amorpho- 

 phallus campanulatus Blume, but the description for the most 

 part and the figure are Amorphophallus, not Tacca. Tacca 

 dubia Schultes was based wholly on Tacca phallifera Rumph,, 

 excluding Taccae fungus and t. 113, f. 2, and is manifestly 

 nothing but Tacca pinnatifida Forst. Forster apparently took 

 his generic name from Rumphius, and in the original publication 

 of the species he cites both Tacca sativa Rumph., t. 112, and 

 Tacca litorea Rumph., t. 11 U, as synonyms. The type, however, 

 was a Polynesian specimen. 



TACCA PALM ATA Blume Enum. PL Jav. 1 (1827) 83. 

 Tacca montana Schultes Syst. 7 1 (1829) 168. 



Tacca rumphii Schauer in Nov. Act. Acad. Nat. Cur. 19 (1843) Suppl. 

 1: 442. 



Tacca montana Rumph. Herb. Amb. 5: 329, t. 115. 



This species is not represented in our Amboina collections. 

 I consider that both forms described by Rumphius — I minor 

 and II major — are referable here. The reduction was first made 

 by Blume. Schultes merely substituted Rumphius's name for 

 that proposed by Blume, reducing Tacca palmata Blume as a 

 synonym. Tacca rumphii Schauer was based on Luzon speci- 

 mens, manifestly the same as Tacca palmata Blume, with the 

 addition of a reference to Tacca montana Rumph. Herb. Amb. 

 5: 329, t. 115. 



DIOSCOREACEAE 



DIOSCOREA Linnaeus 



Rumphius described and figured a number of forms and 

 species of Dioscorea, under the general name Ubium, which have 

 been in part more or less misunderstood by subsequent authors. 

 But two species are represented in our Amboina collections. 

 These are both common and well-known species, so that the 

 material available for study hardly assists in clearing up species 

 of doubtful status so far as those based wholly or partly on 

 Rumphius's descriptions and figures are concerned.* 



*Prain and Burkill. A synopsis of the Dioscoreas of the Old World, 

 Africa excluded, with descriptions of new species and of varieties. Journ. 

 As. Soc. Beng. II 10 (1914) 1-41. 



144971 10 



