LABIATAE 



459 



COLE US Loureiro 



COLEUS AMBOINICUS Lour. Fl. Cochinch. (1790) 372. 



Plectranthus aromaticus Roxb. FL Ind. ed. 2, 3 (1832) 22, non Hort. 



Beng. (1814) 45. 

 Coleus aromaticus Benth. in Wall. PI. As. Rar. 2 (1831) 16. 

 Coleus suganda Blanco Fl. Filip. (1837) 483. 



Marrubium album amboinicum Rumph. Herb. Amb. 5: 294, t. 102, f. 2. 



This species is not represented in our Amboina collections. 

 The plant figured and described by Rumphius is certainly the 

 same species as that described by Loureiro as Coleus amboinicus, 

 the type of the genus Coleus. Loureiro described the species 

 from specimens cultivated in Cochin-China and quotes the 

 Rumphian figure and description as representing his species, also 

 taking his specific name from this source; the plate, by error, 

 is cited as 72 instead of 102. It was originally reduced by Lin- 

 naeus, in Stickman Herb. Amb. (1754) 22, Amoen. Acad. 4 

 (1759) 131, to Nepeta indica Linn.= Anisomeles indica (Linn.) 

 0. Kuntze (A. ovata R. Br.), an entirely wrong disposition of it. 

 Later authors have cited it under Coleus aromaticus Benth., 

 a synonym of Loureiro's species. Plectranthus aromaticus 

 Roxb., as originally published in Hort. Beng. (1814) 45, by 

 citation of Rumphius Herb. Amb. 5: t. 101, is a synonym of 

 Coleus scutellaroides (Linn.) Benth., but as described by Rox- 

 burgh, Fl. Ind. ed. 2, 3 (1832) 22, it is a synonym of Coleus 

 amboinicus Lour.* 



COLEUS TUBEROSUS (Blume) Benth. Lab. Gen. Sp. (1832) 59. 

 Plectranthus tuberosus Blume Bijdr. (1826) 838. 

 Coleus parviflorus Benth. in DC. Prodr. 12 (1848) 72. 

 Glans terrestris costensis Rumph. Herb. Amb. 5: 372, t. 132, f 1. 



This species is not represented in our Amboina collections, but 

 Rumphius's figure and description apply unmistakably to Coleus 

 tuberosus. The reduction seems first to have been made by Don, 

 Gen. Syst. 4 (1838) 685, and the Rumphian figure has been 

 cited under this species, sometimes with doubt, by Walpers, 

 Dietrich, Bentham, and Miquel. Some authors have abandoned 

 the name Coleus tuberosus (Blume) Benth. (1832) in favor of 

 Coleus parviflorus Benth. (1848), on account of the use of the 

 same specific name for another species by Richard, but Coleus 

 tuberosus Richard dates from 1851 and is, of course, invalidated 

 by Coleus tuberosus Benth. 



* See Robinson in Philip. Journ. Sci. 7 (1912) Bot. 414, 418. 



