CONTRIBUTIONS TO BOTANY. 
307 
I have not seen this plant, the characters of which are taken 
from Dr. Eichler’s description. It is certainly not a Pachygone, 
which is entirely an Asian genus: from the size, shape, texture, 
and nervation of its leaves, it resembles many species of Hyper- 
bcena, with which the structure of its male flowers agrees j and in 
its inflorescence, with many aggregated, extremely short axillary 
panicles, it comes very close to Hyperbana crebrijlora and banis- 
teriafolia. Its thick rigid leaves are above 5 inches long, and 
24 inches broad, on a petiole 1 inch long •, the smaller leaves 
are 2 inches long, f inch broad, on a petiole ^ inch long; the 
nervation of the leaf is very difierent from that of Pachygone or 
Cocculus, consisting of from eight to twelve pairs of pinnate 
nerves which anastomose and become divided into very minute 
reticulations — a character almost peculiar to this, among the 
South American genera of the order. The panicles (six to twelve 
in each axil) are inch long, the flowers being ^ line in dia- 
meter, in which character it sufiiciently agrees with the two last- 
mentioned species. 
\ 
42. Chondrodendron*. 
This genus, proposed in 1794 by the authors of the ‘Flora 
Peruviana^ (Prodr. 132), has been recognized by few botanists. 
De Candolle (Syst. i. 522) referred the typical plant to Cocculus, 
while Persoon regarded it as a species of Epibaterium (Ench. ii. 
561). Original specimens exist in the herbaria of the British 
Museum and of M. de Boissier, each with a label in Ruiz’s 
handwriting ; so that the identification of the genus is placed 
beyond doubt : this is a fact of some importance, because hitherto 
its real characters have been involved in much obscurity. Poppig 
in 1838 described and figured a plant (also from Peru) under 
the name of Chondrodendron convolvulaceum, which he conceived 
to be a second species with female flowers ; but in this reference 
he was greatly mistaken ; for it belongs to my genus Odonto- 
carya ; and this mistake has given rise to the many misconcep- 
tions that have been entertained concerning the genus. When 
I published my first notes on the Menispermacece, in 1851, 1 
knew nothing of Chondrodendron beyond the mere details of the 
male flower given in the ‘ Prodromus ’ of Ruiz and Pavon : two 
years afterwards I first saw the typical J' plant ; and it was only 
* I have here corrected the name of this genus, which was originally 
misspelt in the Prodromus of Ruiz and Pavon, through an error in the 
press, which is evident, because they state distinctly that the name was 
suggested by the verrucosities upon the branches (xovSpor) : it is right, 
therefore, that this error, which has been reiterated by all botanists since 
that time, should now be rectitied. 
2r2 
