^ , i SO GENERA OF DIPT3R0CARPACEAS IN THE MALAY PENINSULA/. 
". f ..... 
Lobee t fruiting calyx usually shorter than fruit and not extending 
beyor^ it. 
b. Calyx imbricate in bud. 
c. Calyx-lobes round and recurved;stamens 30-60. ISOPTERA . 
oc.Calyx-lobes not as above;stamens 10 or 15. 
d. Appendix of connective short. SHOBEA (Thiseltoni). 
dd.Appendix of connective long. BALAHOCARPUS. 
bb.Calyx valvatc in bud. 
e. Calyx connate with fruit. PACHYNOCARPUS, 
cc.Calyx not connate with fruit. VATICA. 
aa, Lobes of fruiting calyx longer then fruit. 
b. Calyx-lobeR enclosing or partly enclosing fruit, 
c. With five long wlhgs. DRYOBALANOPS. 
cc.V/ith two long wings, 
d. Stipules large,enclosing stem. BIPTEROOARPUS. 
dd. Stipul es or .ell , deciduous, AlfISOPTlSRA. 
bb.Calyx-tube not enclosing fruit. 
c. Fruit with five long wings.,.,.PARA8K0RHA, 
cc.Fruit with three long wings... 
d. Anther.-? with five pointed appendages. PEUTA01B, 
dd.Anthers with lees th^n five appendages. SHQR32A. 
c c c. Fru:lt wi t h t wo 1 ong v 1 ngs, 
d. Calyx imbr icate in bud. ... .KQPiA. 
dd.Calyx valvato in bud. 
e. Anthers hairy.....COTYLHLGBIUM, 
so . An thera glabrous„ ... VATICA. 
*+ «** «■* •» ep ** «t»»9<4ill 4Mt *» Hi* •* *1 •% 4r* m* ** «*t mu ’•* P* •* w ++ «» m+ 4*4 4B*<»*«***^ #»•*«! 
I -ns glad to see that you do not include the Anciotrocla- 
dace&e with the Diptarocarpaceae. They certainly belong in a 
separate group. 
I realise thnt there are a number of faults to be found 
with the arrangement of genera given by Brandis;but,neverthe¬ 
less, I like it better then any other arrangement which I have 
seen proposed. There are very good anatomical reasons for 
keeping the genus Vatice intact,including the sections Retino- 
dendron, X&auxia,and 8ynn.ptea. it seems to ae a pity to split 
the genus up* With regard to Pechychl&iayB, X am not prepared to 
apeak,as I hsve net yet examined either of the species care¬ 
fully. 
AHISOPTHRA . 
It seems to me that our material shows four species. 
One collection,Fo.647 (F.8,39)collected from Tebong State 
Land in 1916 under the name "Hersaw' has leaves very like some 
forms of Anisoptera thurifera,but the flowers seem different 
and the fruit is rather small,with very large and coarsely veined 
wings. I have done nothing with this form,as 1 thought there 
might already be some work done on it. Is it,by any chance,your 
A.laevie ? 
Anisoptera thurif e r a (Bianco)Blune vs,A.gl abra Kurz. 
I have,ever since I lofeked over the material at Singapore 
in 1910,felt that the relationship or possible identity of these 
two species ought to be cleared up. I copy a note which I set 
down last year,"Is the type of A.glabra preserved ? ,and will it 
be possible to get a photograph or a tracing of it ? If these 
two names represent the same thing,A.thurifera will have to be 
the name used,as it is the older name. ’Te have one sheet in our 
local herbarium named by Ridley at Kew as A.thurifera (C.F.453, 
collected at Sungel Ujong,Plus River,Perak,9-7-12.under the 
name of "Sanie"). 
Brandis (p.4l) refers to Ridley’s No.841,from Ialacca,as 
rather doubtfully A.glabra." 
