376 
MERRILL AND MERRITT. 
“Quant 3. la locality precise je ne puis vous la donner pour la raison que 
l’etiquette de colleeteur manque et que l’etiquette du determinateur, Ad. Brong- 
niart, est libellee ainsi, sans autre indication: ‘Choripetalum Porteemum Ad. Br. 
spec. nov. Manille - Porte, 1864.’ ” 
As a result of the comparison M. Gagnepain reports that Embelia porteana 
Mez, that is, Porte’s specimen, is matched very closely by the foliage of Bur. Sci. 
lOJtll McGregor, even to the oblong transparent glands of the leaves, except that 
the leaves are slightly larger (30 by 10 cm, in the type 22 by 6.5 cm), but that 
the inflorescence is somewhat different in that the flowers are umbellate at the 
extremities of the secondary branches of the inflorescence, and the sepals are 
acuminate, but that For. Bur. 18083 Curran, Merrit’i, & Zschokke, represents a 
quite different species, He suggests that the flowers and leaves of Porte’s specimen 
may have come from separate plants. 
I have very little doubt, however, but that Mr. McGregor’s specimen really 
represents Embelia porteana Mez, for on reexamination of our material I find that 
the sepals are sometimes acute or even blunt, and that the flowers are in part 
subumbellate and in part racemose. The specimen agrees not only in leaf- 
characters with Porte’s plant, as determined by M. Gagnepain, but also with 
Mez’s description as to the puberulent inflorescence, size of the flowers, ciliolate 
and puncticulate sepals, and characters of the petals and Stamens. Mez has 
described the species as having 3-merous flowers, but on our material 4-merous 
flowers are the rule, with occasional 3-merous and occasional 5-merous ones in 
the same inflorescence; the hurried sketch of a single flower supplied by M. Gagne- 
pain, taken from Porte’s specimen, shows a 4-merous one. 
If I am correct in my assumption that two distinct forms are included in the 
original description of Embelia porteana Mez, then the diagnosis of that species 
must be corrected as follows: 
Delete : ( Eolia ) . . . apice acumine brevissimo peracutoque impositi rotundata 
. . . subcoriacea . . . utrinque optime prominenti-reticulata, punctulis minutis 
atris op conspersa .... Bacca optime carnosa, crasse ellipsoidea, 5 mm diam., 
apice stylo persistente crasso brevique in stigma disciforme desinente valde api- 
culata. 
Add : An erect, unbranched shrub 0.5 to 0.8 m high, the stems terete, glabrous, 
brown, nearly 1 cm in diameter at the apex. Leaves alternate, crowded at the 
apices of the stems, chartaceous, broadly oblong-oblanceolate to narrowly elliptic- 
lanceolate, 20 to 30 cm long, 5.5 to 10 cm wide, glabrous except for the very 
numerous, minute, obscure, brown or pale, lepidote scales beneath, with no black 
dots, but with numerous transparent, oblong glands in transmitted light, entire 
or obscurely toothed, brown when dry, scarcely shining, the apex rather abruptly 
and sharply subcaudate acuminate, narrowed below to the narrow and abruptly 
rounded base which is at most 1.5 cm in width; nerves 16 to 18 on each side of 
the midrib, ascending, anastomosing, prominent beneath, not prominent on the 
upper surface, the reticulations lax, nearly or quite obsolete on the upper surface ; 
petioles stout, 1 cm long or less, often nearly obsolete, the stem among and im- 
mediately below the leaves with numerous, imbricate, scarious, membranaceous, 
lanceolate, acuminate, brown bracts (scarcely stipules) 1 to 4 cm in length. 
Panicles few, solitary, slender, in the upper axils, including the peduncles 9 cm 
long or less, bipinnately paniculate, the peduncles slender, up to 6 cm in length, 
the primary branches about 1 cm long, the flowers racemosely or subumbellately 
arranged, their pedicels up to 2.5 mm in length. Staminate flowers yellowish, 2 
mm long, 4-merous, rarely 3-merous or 5-merous. 
As interpreted by me, this species is represented by the type, collected by 
Porte ( Paris Herbarium ) , and by the following specimens : Mindoro, south of 
