1906] The Identity of Eriophorum Chamissonis, &c. 63 



to follow the chief points in the discussion of E. Chamissonis, it 

 becomes necessary to state the matter in simpler language. In 

 doing so, however, I shall refer freely, in order not to over-crowd 

 your valued space, to the discussion already published in Rhodora. 

 The elementary steps in my reasoning are as follows : 



1. Eriophorum Chamissonis of C. A. Meyer was named for 

 Adelbert von Chamisso, who collected it " in Kamtschatka et 

 Unalaschka" and who had called it in a letter E. intermedium, a 

 name which was suppressed on account of the earlier E. inter- 

 medium, Bastard. 



2. As first published in Ledebour's Flora Altaica, x and later in 

 C. A. Meyer's " Cyperaceae Novae." 3 the species was a complex of 

 the Unalaskan and Kamchatkan plant of Chamisso and Altai 

 material from some collector other than Chamisso. 



3. These two elements of Eriophorum Chamissonis, as shown 

 by Meyer's beautiful plate of the familiar plant of Kamchatka and 

 Unalaska whence Chamisso secured his material and by Altai 

 specimens distributed by Meyer, are quite different plants. 



4. The Altai element of Eriophorum Chamissonis has been 

 problematical. Material in the Gray Herbarium is E. callitrix{E. 

 vaginatum of most American authors). 3 and by Nylander 4 it was 

 considered a variety of -". vaginatum. By Fries, however, in 1842 

 (and again in 1844 as indicated by your correspondent), it was 

 treated as identical with E. Scheuchzcri, Hoppe (E. capitatum, 

 Host). 5 This identification of the Altai element of E. Chamissonis, 

 sometimes with the densely caespitose nonstoloniferous E. callitrix 

 and E. vaginatum, sometimes with the noncaespitose freely 

 stoloniferous E. Scheuchzeri (E. capitatum), indicates that there 

 were possibly three or four, instead of two, plants confused by 

 Meyer under the name E. Chamissonis. 



5. It is customary in case of a species containing mixed ele- 

 ments to interpret the species by the best available evidence. The 



1 C. A. Meyer in Ledeb. Fl. Alt. i. 70 (1829). 



2 C. A. Meyer in Mem. Sav. Etrangf. Acad. St. P^tersb. i. 204, t 3(1831). 

 5 See Rhodora, vii. 85, 134, 135 (1905). 



4 Nylander, Acta, Soc. Sc. Fenn. iii. (1852) according to Anders., Bot. 

 Not. (1857) 58. 



5 Fries, Nov. Mant. iii. 170(1842). 



