— 115 - 



Species of Borneo: 



1. Camptandra parvula Ridl. var. o/î^fZs^//b//û RiDL. (1899, 105), Hab. 

 Sarawak, near Matang (Haviland, non vidi) ; Landak (Teysmann) ; the Teys- 

 mann specimen has thin slender ascending stems coated by fugacious 

 sheaths. The leaves are petioled (pet. 10 — 20 mm.) the leaf is lanceolate or 

 oblanceolate, caudate acuminate, mucronate with an acute very oblique, 

 base ciliate at and near the top, 100 — 120X25—30; the conduplicate 

 thinly membranous sheath, 25 mm. long, ends into linear, 7 mm. long auricles. 



The primary bract of the inflorescence, is very acute, conduplicate and 

 saccate, elliptical (30 mm. X20) when expanded, it does not end in an 

 abbreviate blade. It is terminal on a thin peduncle and projects between 

 the sheaths and petioles of the three or four approximate leaves. 



The bract includes one sessile capsule, 3-celled with more than 60 

 scobiform (not "scopiform" as has K. Schumann) seeds, 2 mm. long, fusi- 

 form and falcate with 4 thin laciniae of the arillus, as long as or longer 

 than the seed. Bracts and bracteoles fugacious. 



2. Camptandra gracillima (K. Sch.) Val., Hab. Sarawak near Selebut 

 (Havil. 448, K. Sch., non. vidi.); — Kaempferia gracillima K. Sch. I.e. 



This species seems to differ from the precedent, of which it may be 

 a variety, principally by the abbreviated blade on the bract, the shape of 

 which, however, has not been described. 



3. Camptandra spec. Hab. Ulu-bluoo (Nieuwenh. 284), Sungei-bulit 

 (Nieuw. 274) Leaves elliptic, thick, subsessile, acute, base obtuse. 



Haplochorema K. Sch. 



Haplochorema K. Sch. in Engl, bot J. 27 (1899) 33, 1904, 88;— Ridley 

 Seit, of Borneo (1906), 234. 



This genus, as regards the type species H. uniflorum, agrees with 

 Kaempferia in its strictest sense by its flower characteristic, and differs by 

 the inflorescence which is a fewflowered unilateral spike, and the pauci- 

 ovulate sub unilocular ovary. 



There are described 6 species all from Borneo which I did not see, 

 but there are two detailed drawings of H. uniflorum in the papers cited. 

 From these I gather \hat Kaempferia decus sylvae Umlier, which ScH\JM\m 

 already suggested to belong in this genus is so like to H. uniflorum K. Sen. 

 that 1 have little doubt they are synonyms. 



The description of the ovary by Karl Schumann, ovules erect, arising 

 from the bottom does not quite agree with that of the here described 

 species, where the ovules are affixed (in several flowers examined) to a 



