.'324 FLORA OF SOUTH AMERICA AND THE PACIFIC. 



{n. 889.) — De Candolle has inadvertently made it a part of 

 the generic character that the leaves of the involucre are 

 always reflexed; whereas the greater part of his section Acti- 

 nello, to which this and the next species belong, has them 

 ad pressed. 



1179. (4.) C. Doniana, (H. et A.) ; canescens sufFruticosa.^ 

 foliis linearibus integris acutiusculis, involucri squaniis ad- 

 pressis, corollis radii trilobatis discoque concoloribus, pappi 

 paleis 6- — 8 breviusculis, achenio fulvo-sericeo. — C. suffruti- 

 cosa, Don, mst. — C. elongata, Don, mst. [ex parte,) — San 

 Isidro, Mendoza, and Saladillo, province of Cordova; Dr 

 Gillies, (n. 64, and 62, partly.) — Our specimens from Dr 

 Gillies of what he informed us Mr Don has called C. ehn- 

 gafa, belong partly to this species, and partly to Cercostylis 

 scabiosoides. Several other species are sufFrutescent, whence 

 we have rejected the unpublished name given by Mr Don. 



1180. (1.) Galea pinnatijida, Br.—Less. in Linn. v. p. 158, 

 (cumsynon.) ; DC.f*rodr.\\p.674<. — St Catharines; Tweedie, 

 (w. 102'2.) — Someof our specimens from St Catharines, have 

 the upper leaves quite entire, and agree with the description 

 of C. glabra, DC, found there by Gaudichaud; but our 

 plant has the leaves always more or less scabrous on the 

 upper side. 



1181. (2.) C. cymosa, Less. /. c. DC. Prodr. v. p. 674.— 

 S. Brazil; Tweedie, (n. 1066, 1069.)— Our specimens accord 

 with De Candolle's specific character, except that the upper 

 leaves are occasionally slightly obtuse, and that the scales of 

 the involucre are either obtuse or acute in the same corymb:- 

 the leaves are scabrous on both sides. 



1182. (3.) C. unifiora. Less. I. c. p. Ij9 DC. Prodr. v. 



p. 674.— Banda Orientale; Tweedie, {n. 865.) 



1 183. (4.) C. pedunculosa, DC. Prodr. v. 673. — C. uniflora, 

 forma discoidea, {Less. I. c. p. 158.) — Banda Orientale; 

 Tweedie, along with the last species. — Lessing is probably 

 correct, when he unites these two species; the only difference 

 lies in the presence or absence of a ray. The following de- 

 scription applies to both Folia sessilia, ovata vel ovato- 



