330 



RUMPHIUS'S HERBARIUM AMBOINENSE 



MANGIFERA CAESIA Jack in Roxb. Fl. Ind. 2 (1824) 441. 

 Mangifera kemanga Blume Mus. Bot. 1 (1850) 202. 

 Manga foetida II Rumph. Herb. Amb. 1: 99. 



This species is not represented in our Amboina collections. 

 The reduction follows Blume, who cites Mangifera foetida II 

 under the native name wani in the original description of Man- 

 gifera kemanga. It should be also compared with Mangifera 

 odorata Griff. 



MANGIFERA UTANA Ham. in Mem. Wern. Soc. 5 2 (1826) 326 (type!). 



Mangifera membranacea Blume Mus. Bot. 1 (1850) 195 (type?). 

 Mangifera taipan Ham. ex Miq. Fl. Ind. Bat. 1 2 (1858) 631. 

 Manga silvestris I Rumph. Herb. Amb. 1: 97, t. 27. 



Nothing resembling this species occurs in our Amboina col- 

 lections. The Rumphian figure and description are the whole 

 basis of Mangifera utana Ham., a species properly published, 

 but overlooked by the compilers of Index Kewensis, in which 

 it is not listed. Mangifera membranacea Blume is based, at 

 least in part, on the same Rumphian description and figure ; like 

 Mangifera utana Ham. it is a species of very doubtful status, 

 placed by Engler, in DC. Monog. Phan. 4 (1883) 215, under the 

 ■ heading "species omnino incertae." The figure very closely 

 resembles the Philippine form, Mangifera monandra Merr. 



MANGIFERA INDICA Linn. Sp. PL (1753) 200. 



Manga domestica Rumph. Herb. Amb. 1: 93, t. 25, 26. 



Amboina, Paso, Robinson PI. Rumph. Amb. 125, October 29, 1913, locally 

 known as manga; town of Amboina, PI. Rumph. Amb. 123, 124., August 24, 

 1913, locally known as pan and manga pan. 



Linnaeus originally reduced both tt. 25 and 26 to Mangifera 

 indica Linn., in Stickman Herb. Amb. (1754) 7, Amoen. Acad. 

 4 (1759) 119; and practically all authors have followed him, 

 at least in the reduction of Manga domestica as represented by 

 t. 25. The form represented by t. 26 is almost certainly nothing 

 but Mangifera indica; at least no characters are indicated by 

 which it can be distinguished. It has been cited by Blume and 

 by Miquel as Mangifera altissima Blanco, a very characteristic 

 species that has very little in common with the figure given by 

 Rumphius ; whatever else t. 26 may represent, it is certainly not 

 Mangifera altissima Blanco. 



Rumphius describes five forms of Manga domestica, all of 

 which, with one exception, are surely referable to Mangifera 

 indica Linn. The exception is Arbor mangifera V minor, which 

 Blume has reduced to Mangifera minor Blume, Mus. Bot. 1 



