NEW OR NOTEWORTHY PHILIPPINE PLANTS, VII. 
287 
RHAMNACE7E. 
VENTILAGO Gaertn. 
Ventilago dichotoma (Blanco) Merr. in Govt. Lab. Publ. (Philip.) 27 
(1905) 32, excl. syn. V. luzoniensis Vid. 
Enrila dichotoma Blanco FI. Filip. (1837) 709. 
Ventilago monoica Blanco 1. c. ed. 2 (1845) 124; ed. 3, 1:223. 
Ventilago maderaspatana F.-Vill. Nov. App. (1880) 48, ex syn. Blanco, non 
Gaertn. 
Kurrimia gracilis Vid. Rev. PL Vase. Filip. (1886) 89. 
Ventilago gracilis Merr. & Rolfe in Philip. Journ. Sci. 3 (1908) Bot. 110. 
Luzon, Province of Rizal, San Mateo, Vidal 1122 in Herb. Kew., type of 
Kurrimia gracilis Vid,; Bosoboso, For. Bur. 3073 Ahern’s collector , May, 1905, 
in flower; Pilea, Bur. Sci. 3303 Ramos, June, 1907, in fruit; Montalban, Loiter 
4685, 4686, in Herb. Kew. sub Galearia. 
Endemic. 
The type of Blanco’s new genus and species, Enrila dichotoma, was from San 
Mateo, Province of Rizal, Luzon, and all the above specimens are from the same 
province, and agree with his description. The genus Enrila was placed by 
Bentham in the Anacardiaceae, as a doubtful one, but Blanco properly localized 
it, in the second edition of his Flora de Filipinas, although in reducing Enrila to 
Ventilago, he changed the specific name. It was reduced by F.-Villar to Ven- 
tilago maderaspatana Gaertn., which is certainly an error. Having only flowering 
specimens, Vidal redescribed the species as Kurrimia gracilis, of the Celasl raceae, 
but failed to connect Blanco’s species 'with it, and later in looking over Vidal’s 
specimens in the Kew Herbarium, Mr. Rolfe and myself found Vidal’s type to 
be a Ventilago, rather than a Kurrimia, and accordingly transferred the species 
to the former genus. In making the original transfer of Ventilago dichotoma, 
I cited as a synonym, Ventilago luzoniensis Vid., but this is an error, as an exami- 
nation of Vidal’s type shows that this species is quite distinct from the one here 
considered, and one to which Blanco’s description does not apply. 
Ventilago oblongifolia Blume Bijdr. (1826) 1144; Miq. FI. Ind. Bat. 1 l 
(1855) 640. 
Palawan, Puerto Prineesa, Bur. Sci. 264 Bermejos, December, 1905. Luzon, 
Province of Bulacan, near Norzagaray, Yoder 105, December, 1906. 
New to the Philippines; previously reported only from Java. 
Ventilago luzoniensis Vid. Rev. PI. Vase. Filip. (1886) 90. 
F. 'maderaspatana Vid. Sinopsis Atlas (1883) t. 32, f. I)., non Gaertn. 
Luzon, Province of Tarlac, La Paz, Vidal 198, in Llerb. Kew. 
This endemic species somewhat resembles the preceding one, but is distinguish- 
able by its much smaller leaves. 
Ventilago lucens Miq. FI. Ind. Bat. Suppl. (1860) 330. 
Luzon, Province of Tayabas (Principe), Baler, Merrill 1105, August, 1902. 
This species has previously not been reported from the Philippines, but so far 
as I can determine at present the specimens well represent Miquel’s species, 
although I have not seen the type. King ” states that Ventilago lucens Miq. 
must be very near, if not identical with V. leiocarpa Benth., but the specimen 
above referred to F. lucens Miq., is quite distinct from material in our herbarium 
from Hongkong and from Singapore, supposedly representing Bentham’s species. 
Sumatra. 
0 Journ. As. Soc. Beng. 65- (1896) 380. 
