464 



RUMPHIUS'S HERBARIUM AMBOINENSE 



The specimen almost certainly represents Solarium agreste 

 album Rumph., but S. agreste rubrum may be different. I am 

 not prepared to state that it is the actual form described by 

 Loureiro, Fl. Cochinch. (1790) 129, as Solarium album, although 

 he cites the Rumphian name as a synonym. It is, at any rate, 

 the whole basis of Solarium album Lour. var. rumphii Dunal. 



Solarium pressum Dunal was based wholly on Trongum agreste 

 rubrum Rumph. Herb. Amb. 5 : 241, i. 86, f. 2, and must be inter- 

 preted from the Rumphian figure and description. It may prove 

 to be specifically distinct from the form I have here placed under 

 Solarium album Lour., but no botanical material is available 

 to assist in determining this point. 



SOLAN UM NIGRUM Linn. Sp. PL (1753) 186. 



Solarium triangulare Lam. Encycl. 4 (1789) 290. 



Solanum rumphii Dunal Hist. Sol. (1813) 157 (type). 



Solanum nigrum Linn. var. rumphii Miq. Fl. Ind. Bat. 2 (1857) 636. 



Halicacabus baccifer Rumph. Herb. Amb. 6: 62, t. 26, f. 2. 



This common and widely distributed species is not represented 

 in our Amboina collections. Halicacabus baccifer was cited 

 by Lamarck in the original description of Solanum triangulare, 

 but is not the actual type. It seems, however, to be the whole 

 basis of Solanum rumphii Dunal. The Rumphian figure was 

 first reduced to Solanum nigrum Linn, by Linnaeus, in Stickman 

 Herb. Amb. (1754) 26, Amoen. Acad. 4 (1759) 134, and this is 

 certainly the correct disposition of it. 



SOLANUM VERBASCIFOLIUM Linn. Sp. PI. (1753) 184. 

 Adulterina Rumph. Herb. Amb. 6: 58, t. 25, f. 1. 

 Amboina, Wae, Robinson PL Rumph. Amb. 289, November 26, 1913. 



The figure cited by Linnaeus, in Stickman Herb. Amb. (1754) 

 26, quoted by Hasskarl, Neue Schlussel (1866) 162, is not that of 

 Adulterina, but of Lappago laciniata; that is, t. 25, f. 2, which 

 is Urena lobata Linn. (p. 357) and Triumfetta bartramia 

 Linn. (p. 354). The reference by Loureiro, Fl. Cochinch. 

 (1790) 229, under Lawsonia falcata Lour, is apparently a pure 

 error, for the plant Loureiro describes is totally different from 

 the one that Rumphius figures. It was reduced by Hamilton in 

 Wight and Arnott, Prodr. (1834) 307, to Solanum verbascifolium 

 Linn, and is S. verbascifolium Linn. var. adulterinum Ham. in 

 Walp. Repert. 3 (1844) 53. The plant figured by Rumphius 

 appears to be typical Solanum verbascifolium Linn. 



