108 DR. H. F. HANCE'S SUPPLEMENT TO 
latter varies much, some species or varieties being delicately 
aromatic, others disagreeably rank) quite constantly. It would, 
however, be impossible, without a thorough review of the species 
usually acknowledged, and a comparison of copious suites of 
specimens from various parts of the world, together with au- 
thentic types, to determine the number, limits, and nomen- 
clature of these; and I therefore confine myself, ex rei necessi- 
tate, to this statement. It is but fair to add that my views 
as to the limits of species, or their legitimacy, would doubtless 
often be repudiated by Mr. Bentham; but I speak after pro- 
longed observation of these plants (in a wild state) growing 
under precisely similar circumstances and in the same soils. 
*Wedelia biflora, DC. in Wight's Contrib. Ind. Bot. 18; Benth. Fl. 
Austr. iii. 539, (= Wollastonia biflora, DC.; Benth. Fl. Hongk. 183.) 
The species of Wollastonia vary so much as regards entire 
absence of pappus, or its presence in the shape of a few deci- 
duous bristles, that it is found impossible to retain the genus. 
I have also seen achenes of Wedelia calendulacea, Less., entirely 
without pappus. 
*Saussurea pulchella, Fisch., e. japonica, v. Herder in Plant. Radd. 
Monopet. 51. (=S. japonica, DC.; Benth. Fl. Hongk. 167.) 
Herr v. Herder has, 1 think, acted with great judgment in 
reducing this and many other usually received species to the 
rank of varieties. I had long been satisfied that no specific dif- 
ference exists between the Hongkong and Amoy plant and 
Amurian specimens of the pinnatifid form which is the type of 
S. pulchella. 
*Ixeris ramosissima, 4. Gr. 
Under this name, I am inclined to think, two species are con- 
founded—one a large branching plant, with large runcinate and 
lyrate leaves narrowed into a petiole, the other with small 
scarcely divided stem-clasping leaves, which is near J. sonchi- 
folia, mihi ( Youngia, Maxim.); but the specimens at hand are 
not sufficient to enable me to characterize them satisfactorily. 
Prof. Asa Gray remarks of his Z. stolonifera (Mem. Amer. Acad. 
vi. 397) that it is “doubtless the Youngia pygmea of Ledebour 
and Zuccarini, as to their Japan plant, but not a congener of 
Prenanthes pygmea, Ledeb. (Crepis nana of Richardson), which 
is apparently a Crepis.” But this is too hasty an identification. 
1 
