44 Azotes oil Liliaccce. 



In this work 1 find two obstacles. The tirst is the dititiculty of 

 securing' the bulbs. Of course the larger number can be ob- 

 tained, but many species are only to be had by journeys to out of the 

 way localities. It may be years before some can be secured. The 

 cultivation of these bulbs is by no means a simple matter. It re- 

 quires care and close study of conditions. I am pleased to say 

 that I am now able to grow most species quite satisfactorily. 



The problems to be solved are many. In Lilium, twelve or more 

 species have been described from this coast. It is likely that culti- 

 vation will show the number of varieties to be much greater. In 

 Calochortus, the field of work is large. There is much confusion 

 here. I have no doubt but that several species will, in cultivation, 

 prove to be identical. Here, as often elsewhere, the question arises 

 as to what degree of variation justifies the formation of a species or 

 \ariety, and how much greater the variation should be for one than 

 the other. I should like to see this question discussed. 



In the genus Calochortus it is peculiarly pertinent; since several 

 so called varieties are as well defined as others called species, for in- 

 stance, Calochortus vemcshis, C. lideiis, and C. lutciis var. oadaius 

 and var. citrinus, following Botany of California, as to names. C. 

 luteus. however, is a clearlv defined species as to habit, gland, etc., 

 and so is C. veujislns, the latter much finer and larger in flower, 

 more varied in markings and color. No one having seen either C. 

 Inieus, with its small flower, single color and peculiar gland, or C. 

 ve7iusius, with its markings and brilliancy, would hesitate to identify 

 either anywhere. 



Now, C. liiicus var. ocidahis and var. citrimis have the gland of 

 C. hiteics and that is all. In all other details their habit is that of 

 C. veims/iis. While C. luteiis var. oadatus and var. citrimis meet 

 each other and cross in an interminable number of forms, I have 

 never seen any tendency to cross with C. Iidciis. In fact, I have 

 found the latter the least variable of species. In a field the flowers 

 are alike, and those from far distant localities are identical. Is it 

 not straining a point to refer two very distinct forms to a species 

 that is invariable ? To suppose them to have varied from C. voiustus 

 is still more of an improbability, since there are structural differ- 

 , ences. I think they form a distinct species instead of varieties, and 

 possibly two species. 



In the genus Erythronium, botanists are still at sea, and all along 

 tlie line of Liliacese there are interesting points to be solved. 



