TOTS Ce ee TS ON TIT ENERO 
164 DR. R. R. GATES: A STUDY OF NORTH AMERICAN 
synonyms M. latifolium, Lam. Encycl. iv. p. 25, and M. racemosum, Michx. 
Fl. Amer. i. p. 251. He further states that the flowers are “small, pale 
white, and do not change." That Michaux's M. racemosum is the same plant 
is shown by the character of the petals in his description: * panicula recemoso- 
oblonga, confertiuscula ; laciniis calycinis orbiculatis.” 
Elliott, under the name M. hybridum, Walt., also clearly describes this 
species, his diagnosis being as follows: ^ M. panicula pubescente, racemosa ; 
petalis orbiculatis, plicatis, longe unguiculatis ; glandulis coalitis.’ He 
further says, * glands forming an emarginate circle, at the summit of the 
claw, with a furrow along the centre,” which exactly describes the usual 
condition in this species. 
In the absence of glands, Nuttall concluded that M. hybridum, Walt., must 
be the plant now known as Veratrum parviflorum, Michx., which Nuttall 
clearly describes under the name M. hybridum. But Asa Gray, in his 
description of M. hybridum, Walt., under the name Leimanthium hybridum, 
mentions that the glands are sometimes obsolete. It is evident, then, that 
Walter founded his description on plants of this character. Gray’s 
full description is as follows : “ Foliis lineari-lanceolatis, elongatis ; perianthii 
foliolis anguste unguiculatis, lamina rhomboideo-suborbiculata, margine 
undulata; glandulis conniventibus (quandoque obsoletis); unguibus convoluto- 
canalieulatis, infra medium staminiferus." He evidently gave the species 
careful study, for he deseribes * three forms of Leimanthium hybridum 
(M. hybridum, Walt.) as follows :— 
* a gracilis ; panicula sparsiflora, ramis plerisque simplicibus. 
“ B robustior; foliis inferioribus plantagineis ; ramis imis paniculæ 
compositis. 
* y elata; ramis panicul: plerisque compositis, multifloris.” 
A study should be made of these forms, which differ in the branching of 
the panicles and in the foliage. 
The Schultes’? description of L. hybridum adds further details. ‘There 
remains, then, no reasonable ground for doubt that Pursh, Elliott, and 
Asa Gray were right in their designation of M. Aybridum, Walt., which must 
therefore be known under that name. 
Gray was less fortunate in his characterization of Leimanthium monoicum. 
His description is that of Veratrum parviflorum, while his synonymy refers 
in part to M. monoicum. Kunth also made the mistake of describing 
Veratrum parviflorum under the name Zigadenus monacus. Gray also 
confused Melanthium virginicum, Linn., with M. hybridum, Walt., under the 
name Leimanthium virginicum, while Kunth following him confused the same 
forms under the name Zigadenus virginicus. 
* A. Gray, in Ann. Lyc. New York iv. (1837) 116. 
TOM 
