BURSERACEAE 



303 



CANARIUM OLEOSUM (Lam.) Engl, in Engl. & Prantl Nat. Pflanzenfam. 

 3 4 (1896) 241. 

 Amyris oleosa Lam. Encycl. 1 (1783) 362 (type!). 

 Canarium microcarpum Willd. Sp. PI. 4 2 (1805) 760 (type!). 

 Nanarium minimum s. oleosum Rumph. Herb. Amb. 2: 162 (t. 54.?). 



Amboina, Mahija, Robinson PL Rumph. Amb. 376, October 3, 1913, in 

 light forest at an altitude of 325 meters, locally known as nanari. 



Amyris oleosa Lam. and Canarium microcarpum Willd. are 

 both based solely on Rumphius, and strictly must be interpreted 

 by the Rumphian description and figure; they are, therefore, 

 exact synonyms, and the older name is here retained. The 

 reference of Nanarium oleosum Rumph. to Pimela oleosa Lour., 

 Fl. Cochinch. (1790) 408, is a manifest error, as Loureiro's 

 species was described from Cochin-China material that in all 

 probability represents a species different from the Amboina one. 

 Even though Loureiro cites the Rumphian name as a synonym 

 and took his specific name from Rumphius, the reference to 

 the Herbarium Amboinense should be excluded in interpreting 

 his species. The present interpretation of Canarium oleosum 

 (Lam.) Engl, follows the conventional interpretation of Cana- 

 rium microcarpum Willd., and the Amboina specimen cited 

 agrees closely with other botanical material from the Moluccas, 

 so named, and with Rumphius's description ; it does not, however, 

 agree well with the figure given by Rumphius, which may in- 

 dicate some mixture between the Rumphian figure and descrip- 

 tion. Canarium rostratum Zipp. should be critically compared 

 with it. 



CANARIUM SYLVESTRE Gaertn. Fruct. 2 (1791) 99, t. 102. 



Canarium silvestre alterum Rumph. Herb. Amb. 2: 155, t. 49. 

 Amboina, Hoetoemoeri road, Robinson PI. Rumph. Amb. 378, September 

 30, 1913, in forests, altitude 400 meters; Hitoe messen, Robinson PI. Rumph. 

 Amb. 379, October 14, 1913, in forests, altitude about 200 meters, locally 

 known as dammara itam, nanari, nanari utan, and nanari puti daun alus. 



The specimens agree closely with both the description and 

 figure given by Rumphius, and undoubtedly represent his Cana- 

 rium silvestre alterum. While there may be some doubt as to 

 whether or not the fruit figured by Gaertner represents the 

 exact form described by Rumphius, still it seems best to retain 

 Gaertner's name in its accepted application, especially in view 

 of the fact that he cites the Rumphian figure and description 

 as representing his species. The citation of Rumphius under 

 Canarium sylvestre Gaertn. has been followed by all authors 

 except Loureiro, who places it, with doubt, under Pimela nigra 



