CONTRIBUTIONS TO BOTANY. 
259 
pubescente : racemo ^ in ranmlis novellis axillari, solitario, 
brevissimo , floribus 3-4 fere obsolete pedicellatis bracteaque 
pilosula munito : sepalis 9, quorum 6 minuta, marginibus 
ciliatis, 3 interioribus multo majoribus, cuneato-orbicularibus, 
pallidis, glabris; petal is 6, multo minoribus, oblongis, pal- 
lidis, apice 3-denticulatis, imo auriculatis, lobis inflexis : in $ 
inflorescentia simillima; sepalis ovalioribus; petalis apice 
retusis ; ovariis glabris; stylo brevi; stigmate horizontali ; 
drupis minimis, carnosis, glabris. — In India orientali : v. s. in 
h^rb. Hook. J' et ? , Punjab, Lahore (Falconer, 85 ; Dr. Thom- 
son) ; Moultan (Edgeworth, 1146); Afghanistan 
(Griffiths, 1295). 
A species very distinct from C. Leaba, and seemingly confined 
to the dry arid countries of the Punjab and Afghanistan. The 
young floriferous branches with immature leaves can hardly be 
distinguished from some varieties of C.Leceba -, but wherever the 
leaves are fully grown, the species is immediately recognized by 
their deeply incised obtuse lobes; their surface is more rugose; 
they are very pallid and of a whitish glaucous hue. The leaves 
in the more matured specimens are 12-21 lines long; in the 
latter case, where they are more developed, they are 16 lines 
broad across the basal lobes, and 10 lines broad across the foot 
of the larger middle lobe, the petiole being only 2 lines long. 
The inflorescence is only found in the axils of very young 
branches, where the leaves have not grown to a greater length 
than 4 lines, upon a petiole 1 line long ; it is then barely 1 line 
long, bearing three or four minute flowers : these have nine 
ovate sepals in decreasing series, their margins being furnished 
with long ciliated hairs ; the putamen is very small, only 1^ line 
in diameter. 
35. Nephroica. 
This genus, established by Loureiro, was disregarded by bo- 
tanists for nearly sixty years, until I first pointed out its pecu- 
liar structure and the differences which separate it from Cocculus, 
with which genus it had been associated. De Candolle placed its 
typical species in a particular section, on account of its monoe- 
cious flowers, Loureiro having erroneously stated that male and 
female flowers are found on the same plant ; but his original 
specimen in the British Museum does not present this character, 
nor have I found it in any other of its species. I have elsewhere 
stated that the authors of the ‘Flora Indica’ have declined to 
admit this genns, fusing Nephroica, Holopeira, and Diploclisia 
into Cocculus, because they attach no importance to the shape 
2l 2 
