The genus Cinnamomum

Other Useful Species of Cinnamomum 341
The centre of origin of this tree is regarded as Taiwan, where it is now an endangered
species (Lin et al., 1997). Lin et al. (1997) reported the allozyme variations in this
species in a study comprising 164 clones from four geographical areas. Seven out of the
11 loci examined by them were polymorphic.
C. malabatrum (Burman f.) Bercht & Presl.
C. malabatrum Berchthold & Presl. in Priroz. Rostlin, 2. p 46, 1825; Batka in Nov. Act.
Nat. Cur. 17(2):618 t. 45, 1835; Nees, Syst. Laur, 38 et 663, 1836; Blume, Rumphia,
1.38, 1835; Heynold, nom.bot. nort., 197, 1840; Dietrich, Syn 2: 1334, 1840; Steudel,
Nom. Ed. 2, 1: 366, 1840 et 2: 16, 1841; O’shaughnessy, Bengal Pharmacop. 81, 1844;
Miqual, F1. Ind. Bat. 1(1), 97, 1858; Ann. Miss. Bot. Lugd. Bat. 1, 258, 1864;
Thwaites, Enum. Pl. Zeyl. 253, 1861; Meissner, in DC., Prodr. 15(1) 20, 1864; Hooker,
Fl. Brit. Inida, 5, 130, 1886; Kostermans, Bibl. Lau. 318, 1964; Rheede, Hort. Ind,
Malabaricus, 5, 5, 53, 1685 (‘kattukaruva’).
Basionym Laurus malabatrum Burm. F. Burman, Index alter Rheede, Hort. Malab. (t.53)
5, 1769; Bergius, Mat. Med. 1:318, 1778; Linnaeus. Mat. Med.ed. 5:125, 1787; Lamarck,
Encycl. Bot. 3: 445, 1793; de Candolle, Essaie Propr-med. Pl. 66, 1804; Stokes, Bot.
Mater. Med. 2:411, 1812; Dennstedt, Schleussel, Hort. Ind. Malab., 12, 22, 31, 1818; Th.
& C.G. Nees, de Cinnamomo Disput. 55, 1823; Wallich, Cat. No. 2583-A, 1830; Lindley,
Introd. Nat. Syst. 29, 1831; Fl.med. 331, 1838; Nees in Flora, 15(2): 597, 1831; Syst.Laur
35 et 38, 1836; Meissner, in DC., Prodr. 15(1): 14, 18, 20, 1864 (see Kostermans (1964)
for detailed citations).
This species is a close relative of C. verum and is a highly variable species occurring in
south India, and can be found in the Western Ghats and adjoining areas. Kostermans
(1980) was of the opinion that the Kattu karuva described by Van Rheede in his Hortus
Malabaricus (1685) was nothing but C. malabatrum. According to him this was the species
described under C. iners by Hooker (1886) as well as Gamble (1925). This is a moderately
sized tree, sometimes attaining larger proportions. The leaves are very variable, opposite
or subopposite, coriaceous, elliptic to oblong or elliptic lanceolate, size highly variable,
5–10 cm wide, 15–30 cm long, base acute, tip acuminate, petiole 5–20 mm, leaves
glabrous above, minutely hairy below, triplinerved, the outer pair arising from the base
or slightly above the base, sometimes obliquely placed, the lateral nerves reaching to the
tip of the leaves. Panicles pseudoterminal, lax, many flowered, up to 25 cm long,
branched, minutely hairy, pedicels slender, flower tube shallow, tepals fleshy, ovate, acute,
3–3.5 mm long, stamens 2–2.5 mm, anthers four-celled, filaments pilose, whorls one and
two introrse, three extrorse and glandular, fourth whorl staminodes. Ovary ellipsoid, style
cylindrical, small, peltate. Fruit ellipsoid, up to 8–10 mm, cup deep, rather fleshy, the
base merging to the pedicel, the rim, with persistent thickened tepals of which the apical
part drops off, the basal part rounded and pilose (Kostermans, 1983).
In the past, immature fruits of this species were traded in place of cassia buds, both
as a substitute and as an adulterant. It was used in pan as a substitute for clove buds.
Pan chewing is a habit among many people in South Asia – the basic ingredient of pan
quid consists of betel leaves (Piper betel L.), areca fruit (Areca catechu L.) lime and clove
bud for flavour, with or without tobacco. Local practioners of Ayurveda use the dry,
young fruit as ‘Nagakesar’ (in place of the dried buds of Mesua ferrea, used in other parts
of the country). The bark is extracted, dried, powdered and used as a base material in
the manufacturing of incense sticks (agarbathi). The leaves are used in households as