RUTACEAE 289 



Hasskarl, Neue Schliissel (1866) 99, has suggested that Nugae 

 sylvarum silvestris might be a Zanthoxylum. With Amboina 

 material that certainly represents the Rumphian species, this 

 supposition can now be verified. The specimen is a very close 

 match for Hochreutiner's PL Bogor. Exsiccatae No. 28, which 

 is typical Zanthoxylum glandulosum T. & B., and which Hochreu- 

 tiner interprets as typical Zanthoxylum torvum F. Muell. The 

 same form is found in Luzon, Leyte, and Mindanao in the Philip- 

 pines, so that the known range of the species is now from Luzon 

 to Java, the Moluccas, and tropical Australia. 



FAGARA sp. 



Panax ? anisum DC. Prodr. 4 (1830) 254 (type!). 



Nothopanax ? anisum Miq. Fl. Ind, Bat. 1 1 (1857) 766 (type!). 



Anisum moluccanum Rumph. Herb. Amb. 2: 131, t. 1+2. 



This species is not represented in our Amboina collections. 

 The description in all respects applies to Fagara (Zanthoxylum) , 

 but without specimens I am unable definitely to refer Anisum 

 moluccanum Rumph. to any described Malayan species. So far 

 as can be determined from the description, Panax anisum DC. 

 is based wholly on Rumphius, Nothopanax anisum Miq. being 

 merely a transfer of de Candolle's name. Henschel erroneously 

 referred the Rumphian species to Zanthoxylum aromaticum 

 Willd., an American species. The figure closely resembles 

 Fagara avicennae Lam. 



EVODIA Forster 



EVODIA LATI FOLIA DC. Prodr. 1 (1824) 724 (type!). 

 Ampacus latifolia Rumph. Herb. Amb. 2: 186, t. 61. 



This species was based wholly on Rumphius and must be 

 interpreted entirely from the Rumphian figure and description. 

 Evodia latifolia DC. has been interpreted by recent authors 

 as being represented by Philippine specimens collected by 

 Cuming, but the Philippine material has been described under 

 two different names, Evodia bintoco Blanco and Evodia philip- 

 pinensis Merr. Burman f. thought that the plant figured by 

 Rumphius might be a species of Rhus, Lamarck a Premma 

 or Vitex, and Poiret, with doubt, an Aubertia. De Candolle, 

 however, based his Evodia latifolia wholly on Rumphius. 

 It has also been called Zanthoxylum latifolium Don, Fagara 

 latifolia Roxb., and Zanthoxylum rumphianum Cham. It 

 is undoubtedly a true Evodia. Miquel, Ann. Mus. Bot. Lugd. 

 Bat. 3 (1867) 244, has redescribed Evodia latifolia DC. from 

 Halmaheira specimens, and his description conforms closely 



144971 19 



