- 8 - 
y 
Ace these species really published in La::. , Bncycl. vol .III* 
which Is 8U;.:p038d to be naFi.es £■pom G to $1 ? or a a they pub j ithed 
in & Supplement to Vol A) Or* are they really uug! ished in Vol i. 
If A ,i sea Lam. is published in incycl * Vol. I, ' 7-3* it *111 
be the earliest name for the Jack fruit (taking A •- int ? ^ ra. as the 
Chemped&k) . But if A, ;jaca is in Vol, 5* then Si too ium 
esulif 1 oru fi» Guer* trier 178 (Sef.H) is the earliest name for the 
Jack-fruit. 
I relieve n .hetorcp h yl 1 a is a different species from A.jaca , 
though reuuceri t. ; it oy all au thors. It may oe a. lar;oe* e f oj la 
Hqjlq . or an ot her I nd isn spe ie s. 
8 . Please examine l ouroiro's type specimen of Pol:, pic r<i e ch ampeden 
which >.<e rri 1 1 so j s 1 n t he P .!' . 
Is it the back- fruit- or the Cheirpedak 0 The Chemredek of 
Jjf ,■ T , \t a V\ *\ C ' i Of, if. fi i-' «n 
; j (U * Ca J Cl 1 . w4 O l 1 L i i ^ •- * ' vi ; v k -« C l . * 
Tl 
19 * ack- 
1 * pu“ t is 
soec 
f hairs. 
Does t 
loro, -;.ir*y hairs on the stioules, 
twigs. >e Holes. eduncles . rid 1- - eirs on r; *•» underside of the 
r, r*ou <? or riih rP„or»t, fino, sparse, 
Doe 3 tie label ch. or that it our e from Aalucca, 
Cochi r * -chi n & o r w h ere '• 
I am not sure that Loureiro’s specimen i m either the Jack- 
fruit or the Ghempeaak. -here did tie specimen come from'' Is 
any 
there asiy indication on the label 0 (Bee my remarks under 
A. polyphema ) t.oureiro f s specimen may or A.l pwii , which ia glaucous 
and has 10-17 fre. of side veins off the midrib; 'the JacK-fruit 
arts the C empectak have k-1 0 pairs. 
Is there a specimen of Po ly phema j ura Lour • in the B. ■„ 
If so, what is it and where did it come from? 
10 . If the examinetion of Radermacher's specimen at Uppsala 
corrobote the evidence of the description that A.integrlfolia 
( * A.In tegra ) is the chempeoak and not the Jack-fruit, should the 
names A. in ce*;rifol is and A. Integra be discarded as ones that will 
/ £> 2 - 
