COULTER AND ROSE—NORTH AMERICAN UMBELLIFERAE. 79 
Type locality, ‘‘ Montana, Bridger Mountains;” collected by /yd- 
berg & Bessey, no. 4626, June 15, L897; type in Herb. Columbia Univ., 
duplicate in U.S. Nat. Herb. 
Bridger Mountains, Montana. 
Specimens examined : 
Montana: Type specimens as cited under type locality; same station and date, 
Rydberg & Bessey 4625; Flodman 695, in 1897. 
We quote the original description of this species, as the material does not permit 
us to determine the genus to which it belongs. Fruiting specimens of what appears 
to be this species were collected by Mr. Frank Tweedy in the Big Horn Mountains 
of Wyoming in 1899. The fruit is oblong, 8 mm. long, flattened laterally, the sur- 
face slightly roughened, and with no stylopodium. 
15. DEWEYA Torr. & Gray, FI. 1: 641. 1840. 
Calyx teeth prominent. Fruit oblong, flattened laterally, glabrous. 
Carpel with 5 prominent very acute ribs. Stvlopodium none.  Car- 
pophore divided. Oil tubes several in the intervals and on the com- 
missural side. Seed nearly terete in section, the face deeply sulcate. 
Caulescent plants, with simply pinnate leaves, mostly no involucre, 
involucels of few linear bract- 
lets, and yellow flowers. 
Typespecies, Deweyaarguta 
Torr. & Gray. 
A monotypic genus, so far 
as known, belonging to the 
mountains of southern Cali- 
fornia and Lower California. 
The genus Deweya has been re- | 
ferred to Velaea and to Arracacia, 
which two genera are now merged 
under the latter name, but differs 
chiefly in its lack of stylopodium ~ ANG 
and pinnate leaves. Its relation- Fic, 14.—Deweya arguta: a, x 4; b, x8. 
ship is nearest to Tauschia, from 
which it differs in its very sharp prominent ribs, prominent and persistent calyx 
teeth, as well as inits range. Drude in Engler & Prantl’s Nat. Pflanzfam, has asso- 
ciated Deweya with Museniopsis as subgenera under Velaea, but it is more clearly dis- 
tinct from Museniopsis than from Tauschia. In our Rev. N. Aim. Umbell. we were led 
to associate with D. arguta certain other species which had been described under the 
genus, and which had gradually come to stand for it. Accordingly D. arguta came 
to be regarded as an exceptional species, rather than the type of the genus. We 
have here maintained Deweya as at first established, and have separated from it the 
subsequently described species as representing a genus more distinct from Deweya 
than is Deweya from Tauschia. 
1. Deweya arguta Torr. & Gray, Fl. 1: 641. 1540. Fia. 14. 
Ligusticum argutum Nutt. in Torr. & Gray, Fl. 1: 641, 1840, 
Arracacia arguia Watson, Bibl. Index 419. 1878. 
Velaea arguta C. & R. Rey. N. Am. Umbell. 120, | 1888. 
V. arguta ternata C, & R, Bot, Gaz, 14: 282, 1889, 
5872 6 
