38 The Philippine Journal of Science 1913 
Var. MEYENIANA (Walp.) comb. nov. 
Spermacoce meyeniana Walp. in Nov. Act. Acad. Nat. Cur. 19 (1843) 
Suppl. 1:353; F.-Vill. Novis. App. (1880) 113. 
This form is very similar indeed to the species, H. philippensis, but 
its leaves and branchlets are entirely smooth and glabrous. It approaches 
very closely to Hedyotis prostrata (Blume) Korth., and is doubtless the 
Philippine form referred to the latter species by Valeton,^ who cites, 
by error, Elmer Itl33 instead of 9153, a specimen I have not seen. See 
above under H. prostrata. The question as to whether or not Spermacoce 
meyeniana Walp., is absolutely identical with Hedyotis prostrata Korth., 
will have to be left to the future monographer who may have an op- 
portunity of making direct comparisons of the types. 
Hedyotis philippensis var. meyeniana (Walp.) Merr., is represented 
by a large series of specimens, as follows: Luzon, Province of Isabela, 
Bur. Sci. 7 97 It Ramos: Province of Zambales, Bur. Set. Jt758 Ramos: 
Province of Pangasinan, Bur. Sci. Jt896 Ramos: Province of Laguna, 
Meyen (type in herb. Berol.), Bur. Sci. 97 U3 Robinson, For. Bur. 13319 
Tamesis: Province of Rizal, Loher 6358: Province of Bataan, Mount 
Mariveles, For. Bur. 3061, 122i, 2379 Borden, Whitford 212, Williams 
622, Copeland 287, Merrill 3753, Phil. PL 779 Merrill. POLILLO, Bur. Sci. 
6832 Robinson. MINDORO, For. Bur. 8837, 9953, 12137 Merritt. Negros, 
Whitford lltOk- Basilan, For. Bur. iOOS Hutchinson, Bur. Sci. 9988 Rob- 
inson. 
Many of the above specimens have been determined and distributed as 
Hedyotis congest a R. Br., a manifestly allied species, which Valeton has 
reduced to H. prostrata Korth. 
Var. ASP ERR IMA var. nov. 
A typo difFert foliis pallidioribus ramulis foliisque utrinque 
dense minuteque asperulis. 
Palawan, Malampaya Bay, Merrill 7252 (type) . Culion, Merrill U87 , 
Jf31t, December, 1902, in dry forests and thickets. 
The leaves are so exceedingly scabrid that the form has been designated 
as above, although it may prove to be worthy of specific rank. 
HEDYOTIS COSTATA (Roxb.) Kurz in Journ. As. Soc. Beng. 45= (1876) 
135. 
Spermacoce costata Roxb. Hort. Beng. (1814) 10, nomen; FI. Ind. 1 
(1832) 370. 
Metabolus lineatus Bartl. in DC. Prodr. 4 (1830) 435, non Hedyotis 
lineatus Roxb. 
Hedyotis vestita R. Br. in Wall. Cat. (1829) no. 847, nomen; G. Don 
Gen. Syst. 3 (1834) 526. 
Metabolus caeruleus Blume Bijdr. (1826) 992, non Hedyotis coeruleus 
W. & A. 
Luzon, Province of Laguna, Los Banos, Holman 86; San Antonio, Bur. 
Sci. 10991 Ramos: Province of Rizal, Loher 634.9, Bur. Sci. 3352, 5209 
Ramos. Palawan, Merrill 5248. Culion, Merrill 541- 
Roxburgh’s specific name costata is the oldest valid one for this widely 
’Engl. Bot. Jahrb. 44 (1909) 544. 
