37 
X. stricta, Chapm. is undoubtedly the same as X. ambigua. 
Dr. Chapman speaks of the leaves of the former as being rough- 
edged, while those of the latter are smooth. I am unable to find 
such a difference. Again the heads of amdbigua are said to be 
oblong, ovate-lanceolate or acute, while those of strzcta are ob- 
long or cylindric. The heads of ambigua are often obtuse and 
cylindric, while those of stricta are sometimes acute. I can find 
no constant difference in the shape of the sepals. 
In X. rhombipetala, Sauv. the shape of the sepal and whole 
form of the plant are the same as in amdigua. 
North Carolina.—Wilmington, W. M. Canby. 
South Carolina.—Society Hill, M. A. Curtis; Sumter Co. J. 
D. Smith. 3 
Florida.— Apalachicola, A. H. Curtiss, No. 3,002; Walton 
Co., A. H. Curtiss, No. 16; Chapman. 
Texas.—Wright, Herb. Harvard Coll.; Hempstead, E. Hall, 
No. 671; Hardin Co., G. C. Nealley (1884); Austin, F. Rugel. 
4. XYRIS FLEXUOSA, Mihl. 
X. jupicai, Michx. Fl. Bor. Amer. i. 23 (1803). ? 
X. flexuosa, Miihl. Cat. 5 (1813). 
X. bulbosa, Kunth, Enum. iv. 11. (1843). 
X. scabra, Engelm. Mss. in Herb. Col. Coll. 
Scape twisted, straight or spiral, two-edged above; root 
‘ somewhat bulbous; leaves linear, twisted; spike globose, few 
flowered ; lateral sepals linear, curved, fringed the whole length 
of the wingless keel. : 
New Hampshire.—Jefferson Highlands, T. G. White. 
_ Connecticut.—Waterford, W. H. Leggett; New Haven, in 
Herb. Harv. Coll. , 
Rhode Island.—Providence, S. T. Olney. 
Massachusetts.—Salem, J. W. Chickering, Jr. 
New York.—Herkimer Co., J. A. Paine ; Cold Spring, Long 
Island, H. Ries. 
New Jersey.—A. Gray ; Atlantic Co., C. F. Parker. 
Pennsylvania.—Chester Co., in Herb. W. M. Canby (1 865) ; 
C W. Short (1842). : 
Delaware.—Newcastle, Herb. Ae Canby. 
Maryland.—Stockton, H. H. Rusby. 
biter of Columbia.—Washington, L. F. Ward ; Holmead | 
Swamp, G. Vasey. 
