33 
Virginianum, which takes precedence by at least ten years earlier 
publication (O. Swartz, in Schrad. Journ. Botan. 1800-1801). 
The species was collected in Arizona during the past year by Mr. 
Pringle along wnth Ophioglossum jiudicaule, Notholmna Aschenborniana, 
Pellcea cordata^ PellcBa atropurpurea Nothol(£na nivea, Asplenium 
parvulnvi and monanthemum^ Aspidiiim Filix-inas, Cheilanihes Pringlei^ 
and others. 
Botrychiu7ti matricarmfolium^ A. Br., why Botrychium rntac€U7ny 
Swz.? — The use of the name B, rutaceum^ Swz. (Gilbert /. c.)^ as a 
synonym for this species is somewhat misleading. Dr. Milde has 
shown that Swartz was not acquainted with our plant, and that his 
riitaceiun was only a form of B, ternaiu7n^ as verified in Swartz's own 
herbarium by Angstrom. There is therefore no propriety in writing 
B, riitaceum, Swz,, for B. niatricaruBfolium^ A. Br., at this late day, 
however much there might have been before the confusion into which 
the synonomy of the Boirychia was thrown by various writers was 
unravelled by Dr. Milde's masterly treatise. 
I read Mr. Gilbert's note (/. c.) on the variation in the bud-forms 
in this species with much interest and pleasure. 
I have myself previously recorded (see Bulletin for September 
^88 1 ) a single instance of variation in the bud-form of a mature 
specimen of this species, and of B, simplex also. Since that time I 
have examined a great many specimens without finding another 
iristance, but have found the general character of the buds as hereto- 
fore described remarkably uniform and reliable. It should be 
remembered in connection with this that the full descriptions of the 
different buds in my vernation notes (Bulletin, January 1878) w^ere 
based upon mature vernation, and that sufficient qualification was 
niade in the text for different stages of development. In reference to 
the present species, I therein stated that while the matured form of 
the bud is so distinct from that of every other species that one could 
^ot possibly mJstake it for any other, yet, in its earlier stages of 
development, it at one time bears some resemblance to the matured 
bud of B. simplex, at another time to the matured bud of B, Lunaria, 
and only gradually assumes wuth its growth its distinctive character. 
It will be observed, however, that even in its youngest condition it is 
not only distinguished from the bud of B, simplex by the partially 
curved apex of the sterile portion, but by the significant development 
c>f the common stalk, that being by far the longest portion of the 
^vhole bud, whereas in B. simplex the common stalk is usually the 
shortest. To this, adding that, in the three smaller species, being 
given specimens of an equal and corresponding growth, the buds 
^vill be found to be distinct and characteristic. 
These views I have as yet seen no reason to change, and it is to 
be expected from them that in this species, whenever from any cause 
plants fail to mature fully, some deviation from the fully described, 
niatured venation is to be looked for, though not of sufficient char- 
^'^cter to prevent determination. 
In cases, however, where there may be a doubt otherwise, an 
examination of the spores must be resorted to, as previously stated. 
IVernation Notes, /. c) 
) 
