66 Rhodora [APRIL 
AMARANTHUS HYBRIDUS, forma hypochondriacus (L.), n. comb. 
A. hypochondriacus L. sp. Pl. ii. 991 (1753). А. hybridus, var. 
hypochondriacus Robinson, RHODORA, x. 32 (1908), by clerical error. 
ACTAEA RUBRA (Ait. Willd., forma neglecta (Gillman), n. comb. 
A. neglecta Gillman in Lloyd, Drugs and Medicines, 235 (1884—5). 
A. eburnea Rydb. Mem. N. Y. Bot. Gard. i. 153 (1900). This is 
the problematic Actaea, seemingly merely a color form of A. rubra, 
which has white berries on slender pedicels. 
ВАСОРА acuminata (Walt.), n. comb. Gratiola acuminata. Walt. 
Fl. Car. 61 (1788). Maturea nigrescens Benth. Comp. Bot. Mag. i. 
173 (1835). Herpestis nigrescens Benth. Comp. Bot. Mag. ii. 56 
(1836). Monniera acuminata Ktze. Rev. Gen. ii. 463 (1891). This 
new combination and the next are necessitated by the legalization of 
Bacopa through its inclusion in the list of nomina conservanda of the 
Vienna Rules. 
Bacora caroliniana (Walt.), n. comb. Obolaria caroliniana Walt. 
Fl. Car. 166 (1788). Monniera amplexicaulis Michx. Fl. Bor. Am. ii. 
22 (1803). Herpestis amplexicaulis Pursh, Fl. Am. Sept. 418 (1814). 
Monniera caroliniana Ktze. Rev. Gen. ii. 463 (1891). 
ILYSANTHES. For some years it has been known that there are 
two kinds of Jlysanthes growing in the northeastern United States. 
Whether these are to be regarded merely as varieties of the same spe- 
cies or are better treated as fairly independent species is still to some 
extent an open question. For the latter course it may be urged that 
the ranges of the two are not entirely identical, that the differences of 
the plants in question, when once understood, are pretty readily seen, 
and finally that the copious material of the two, collected during recent 
years, instead of showing further evidence of intergradation, tends rather 
to prove a fairly high degree of constancy in their differences. Ассері-. 
ing at least provisionally the view that these plants are better treated 
as species, we are confronted with the problem of their specific nomen- 
clature. The plants in our present discussion may be distinguished 
as I and II with the following salient distinctions. 
I. Leaves relatively large, ovate to oblong; lower pedicels only 
about as long as the subtending leaves or shorter; calyx-lobes linear 
about equalling or slightly exceeding the ellipsoidal pod. 
II. Leaves smaller; pedicels long and filiform, even the lower 
ones much exceeding the subtending leaves; calyx-lobes somewhat 
shorter than the pod. 
