a RS ii... bau 
SOME ORITICAL SPECIES OF ECHIUM. 389 
usually very unsatisfactory in this genus. They should be collected with 
the complete radical leaves before flowering, then in flower, and again with 
fully developed fruiting spikes. Both true pustulatum and vulgare var. 
grandiflorum differ from our English vulgare in a more branching habit, which 
however is not developed in weaklings ; in corollas normally larger, of a 
different blue, which shows purple streaks or a slight purple tinge ; in 
stamens not so far exserted * ; and particularly in the nutlets, which, instead 
of being merely rugose with inconspicuous, if any, tubercles, are remarkably 
papilloso-tuberculate. This last character has been rather cavalierly treated 
by de Coincy, op. cit. p. 303, but if it can be established as constant it would 
be decisive in favour of a specific separation from vulgare of the forms in 
which it occurs. But it requires further observation on a sufficient number 
of fresh specimens in different regions. 
There is one other point to notice. De Coincy, at pp. 303 and 323, 
distinguishes vulgare and pustulatum, treated as a variety of vulgare, as 
having glabrous filaments, whilst in tuberculatum, Hoffmg. et Link, * at least 
one of the three posterior filaments is hairy, and usually all three." Though 
hairy filaments are very important in some other species, notably in grandi- 
florum, Dest., they afford so feeble a character in tuberculatum (which is quite 
distinguishable on other grounds) that it has been deliberately ignored by 
Prof. Coutinho, The hairs are very few and very weak, and extremely difficult 
to see in any herbarium specimen—indeed, I very much doubt the constancy 
of their presence. Yet they are not always entirely absent, as they are in 
all forms of vulgare and in all specimens of pustulatum that I have examined, 
I have refrained from dissecting the few remaining corollas of Sibthorp’s 
type, but as far as can be seen they are glabrous, and so they are in Todaro’s 
identical plant.’ Nevertheless, in the detail of tab. 180 at least two of the 
tilaments are shown as hairy, and I have verified that they were so drawn by 
Bauer in his original sketch. The kind of hairs figured, sparse and slender, 
suggests that Bauer must have really seen them. They are not the kind of 
pubescence that an artist would be likely to introduce apart from actual 
observation, I am unable to explain this matter further. 
(IIL) ECHIUM ANGUSTIFOLIUM, Mill., labelled by Smith * Echium hispidum 
list of figs. Naples. Sibth. in H. Banks." This is precisely E. hispidum 
of Fl. Gr. tab. 181. The synonymy is Æ. angustifolium, Mill. Gard. Dict. 
(1768), non Lam. — E. hispidum, Prodr. Fl. Gr. p. 125 (1806) = Æ. elegans, 
Lehm. Asperif. p. 459 (1818) — Æ. Sibthorpii, R. et S. Syst. iv. p. 26 (1819) 
= E. sericeum var. hispidum, Boiss. Or. iv. p. 207 (1879). 
* The phrases “included” and “exserted” have been used ambiguously of the stamens 
of the irregular corollas of this genus. By “included,” I understand shorter than the lower 
lip of the corolla; “exserted” should, I think, mean exceeding the upper lip. Stamens 
that exceed the lower, but fall short of the upper, lip may fairly be said to equal the corolla 
and be called sub-exserted. 
