BOTANICAL NOTES. 
209 
ANACARDIACEAE. 
Buchanania arborescens (Bluine) Blume, 6979, local name niogniogan. 
ICACINACEAE. 
lodes philippinensis Merr. in Philip. Journ. Sci. 3 (1908) Bot. 241. 
Represented by 9263; other distribution Leyte, Masbate, Cebu, Romblon, Min- 
doro, Palawan. 
Phytocrene blancoi (Azaola) Merr. in Philip. Journ. Sci. 2 (1907) Bot. 432. 
Represented by 10339 ; other distribution Bulacan, Rizal, Laguna, Leyte, and 
Mindanao. 
SAPINDACEAE. 
Allophylus leucocladus Radik, supra 181. 
Only known collection, 6880. 
Allophylus ternatus (Eorst.) Radik, in Engl. & Prantl Nat. Pflanzenf. 3 5 
(1895) 313. 
Represented by 6953; other Philippine distribution Cagayan, Tayabas, Albay, 
Leyte, Mindoro, Mindanao, Basilan, and Zambales. 
Dictyophora rhomboidea Radik, supra 182. 
Only known collection, 10359 , 
M ischocarpus sundaicus Bl. Bijdr. (1825) 238. 
Represented by 9070, 9179; other Philippine distribution Nueva Ecija, Davao; 
local name salab. 
Otophora oliviformis Radik, supra 181. 
Only known collection, 10330. 
Trigonachras cuspidata Radik, supra 182. 
Only known collection, For. Bur. llf.ll Hagger. 
RHAMNACEAE. 
Colubrina asiatica (Linn.) Brongn., 6955, local name cabatiti: Gouania micro- 
carpa DC., 6882, 9069. 
VITACEAE. 
Ampelocissus imperialis (Miq.) Planch, in DC. Monogr. Phan. 5 (1887) 408. 
This species, or more exactly the variety lobata, is represented by 10773 ; 
other distribution (species ,and variety) Tayabas, Mindanao, Culion, Sumatra, 
Borneo, probably Java. 
Leea congesta Elmer Lead. Philip. Bot. 1 (1908) 318. 
Two collections, 6850 and 10375, both fruiting, agree well with the type ma- 
terial, except that the leaflets and petioles are longer. Other distribution Ilocos 
Norte, Benguet, Rizal, Tayabas, Mindanao. 
Leea negrosensis Elmer Leafl. Philip. Bot. 2 (1908) 494. 
It seems probable that this species is represented by 6839, the inflorescence 
and flowers being entirely similar, except that the calyces are minutely pubescent 
and smaller by half than as described for the type, agreeing in this respect with 
the specimen of the latter here, both differences probably due to difference in 
age. There is more difficulty with the leaves. . Of the Polillo plant, two leaves 
