CONVOLVULACEAE 



441 



Amboina, Hatalai Robinson PL Rumph. Amb. UOJ+, October 24, 1913, 

 roadsides at an altitude of about 300 meters. 



The reduction of Convolvulus laevis Rumph. to Convolvulus 

 cymosus Desr. was made by Desrouss, in Lamarck's Encycl. 3 

 (1791) 556, but the description was based on an actual specimen 

 collected by Sonnerat. Vahl, Symb. 3 (1794) 30, makes the 

 reduction to his Convolvulus bifidus in the original description of 

 that species, but as was the case with Convolvulus cymosus, the 

 description was based on an actual specimen. There is not the 

 slightest doubt that the figure given by Rumphius represents the 

 common and well-known species, Merremia umbellata Hallier f. 

 The Amboina specimen cited above is the form with white 

 flowers, designated by Hallier as Merremia umbellata var. orien- 

 talis Hallier f. ; but this varietal name, if the variety be main- 

 tained, should probably give place to the designation cymosa, 

 this being the oldest name for the oriental form. 



MERREMIA PELTATA (Linn.) Merr. comb. nov. 



Convolvulus peltatus Linn. Sp. PI. (1753) 1194 (type!). 

 Ipomoea peltata Choisy Mem. Soc. Phys. Genev. 6 (1833) 452 (type!). 

 Convolvulus laevis indicus major (alba) Rumph. Herb. Amb. 5: 428, 

 t. 157, f. 1, 2. 



Amboina, Hoetoemoeri road, Robinson PI. Rumph. Amb. U01, September 

 30, 1913. climbing on trees at an altitude of about 225 meters; flowers white. 



Convolvulus laevis indicus major "Rumf. amb. 6. p. 1+28. t. 

 159" is the whole basis of Convolvulus peltatus Linn., and the 

 species must be interpreted solely from the Rumphian figure and 

 description. Two plants are figured on the plate, not clearly 

 separable, and probably both are forms of one species; but 

 figure 2 is indicated by Rumphius as belonging with the descrip- 

 tion Linnaeus designated as the type of his species. Merremia 

 nymphaeifolia (Blume) Hallier f. (Ipomoea nymphaeifolia 

 Blume) has been distinguished from the Linnean species by 

 Hallier f. as distinct because of its yellow flowers, the Amboina 

 plant having white flowers, both as described by Rumphius and 

 as the field note on the Amboina specimens, cited above, shows. 

 I cannot, however, detect a single other character by which the 

 two species can be distinguished ; and I consider it very probable 

 that Merremia nymphaeifolia Hallier f. must be reduced to M. 

 peltata (Linn.) Merr., as a variety or form with yellow flowers. 

 I have for purposes of comparison a very full series of specimens 

 from the Philippines and some material from Java, named by 

 Hallier himself as Merremia nymphaeifolia. All of our numer- 

 ous Philippine specimens have yellow flowers. Figure 1 of 



