Mexican Species and Varieties of Bromus 243 



236. 1842. It is, however, without description in the place cited 

 by Fournier and must be regarded as first published by him as cited. 

 The question arises, however, as to what should be considered 

 the type of this species. Ruprecht 1. c. cites a single specimen, 

 no - 5757 H. Galeotti collected " dans les forets du Cerro San 

 Felipe pres d'Oaxaca a 8000 pied d'elevation." The same num- 

 ber is also cited by Fournier and his specimen should, we think, 

 be considered the type of the species rather than the first speci- 

 men cited by him which it seems to us best to take as a rule. The 

 sketch and spikelet from Galeotti's no. 5757 in the Museum 01 

 Paris shows this plant to be inseparable from Br omits Porten 

 (Coult.) Nash. Fournier speaks in his description of a con- 

 spicuous tongue-shaped ligule, but Mr. Baldwin's sketch of the 

 specimen does not show a ligule any larger than is usually present 

 in Bromus Porteri y and we feel safe in referring Bromus anomalus 

 to B. Porteri (Coult.) Nash as a synonym. 



All the following forms belong to the subgenus Ceratochloa. 



* 



Ceratochloa festucoides Beauv. Fourn. /. c. 



This name used by Beauvois in the index to his Agrost. 158, 

 is taken up for the Ceratochloa unioloides Beauv. Agrost. Ind. 164 

 and Explan. PI. 11. 18 12. We can find nothing in Beauvois to 

 justify the assumption that these were regarded by him as 

 synonyms. The inference we make from a comparison of similar 

 cases in Beauvois is that he was either proposing a new species or 

 transferring Link's Bromus festucoides to Ceratochloa. From the 

 fact that he uses the combination Ceratochloa unioloides in his 

 explanation of plates it appears to be clear that he did not intend 

 to supplant the name Festuca unioloides by Ceratochloa festucoides. 

 Supposing, however, that it were a clear case of synonymy, we 



can see no reason 



/« 



unioloides. In any case its use in the genus Bromus is invali- 

 dated by the existence of an earlier Bromus festucoides Link, 



Journ. 2 : 315. 1799. 



An 



H.B.K. and a spikelet from the same shows that the doubt in- 

 dicated by the writer in Bull. 23 : 50. Div. Agrost. U. S. Dept. 

 Agr. regarding the synonymy of the species was well founded and 



