8 



of the name, was not the first to apply it to a genus. In Gen. PI. ed. 

 4, 26. 1752, he cites Monti (Cat. Stirp. Agri. Bonon. Prod. 32. 1719) 

 as the author of the genus. For figures of species which he evidently- 

 regarded as typical he cites Scheuchzer's Agrost. Helv. Prod. pJ. J. 

 fgs. ^, 10^ 11, 12. 1708. Referring to Scheuchzer\s figures, No. 2 

 appears to be a species of Desoliampsla, which Linnaeus one year later, 

 Sp. PI. 1 : 65. 1753, refers to Aira coBspitma, but does not mention it 

 under Bromus, so it is rather evident that the reference to it laider 

 that genus was an error. The next figure cited, 10, is undoubtedly a 

 Bromus, and is referred by Linnteus to B. arvensis 1. c. by citation 

 of description but not of figure. By some error on the part of Scheu- 

 chzer, his figure 10 is referred to on different pages as representing two 

 different things. Figure 11 Linnanis refers in the same place to B. 

 sqnarrosiis 2iU(\. ^guvQ 12 in the first edition of '^Species Plantarum" 

 is referred to B. tectorum, but in the second edition it is referred to 

 B. moUis {hordeaceus), which it evidently is. Thus it is sufficiently 

 clear what section at least of the genus as here treated, Linnteus had 

 in mind as the basis of his genus. But according to the present rules 

 of American nomenclature, 1753 is taken as the starting point for 

 genera as well as species. Following this, some arbitrary means must 

 be resorted to in deciding what shall be recognized as the types of 

 Linnffius's genera, since there are no generic descriptions in the 

 "Species Plantarum." The most simple and logical plan we belicA^e 

 would be to adopt the first species mentioned as the type, which, applied 

 to the case in hand, would make the tj^pe of our genus B. secalinv^s, 

 thus bringing about in this case practically the same results as b}^ the 

 first method, as the species first referred to by Linnaeus, B. arvensis, 

 B. squarrosus, and B. mollis are all intimately related to B. secalinus. 



This o-enus in the sense in which it is here treated has been the sub- 

 ject of many divisions and subdivisions; at least ten different genera 

 based upon various species have been proposed. The present tendency 

 among manj^ botanists is toward the narrower limitation of genera, 

 but it has seemed best in this paper to maintain the genus in its 

 broadest sense. Of the various genera proposed Ceratochloa is per- 

 haps, on the whole, the best defined, while the subgenus Neohromiis 

 is rather anomalous, and may be eventually found worthy of generic 

 rank. This subgeims, which includes so far as at present known only 

 Bromus trinii and its several varieties, shows very close relationship 

 with Avena and Trisetum, to each of which genera forms of it have 

 been referred. In its various forms it appears to have reached its 

 greatest development in the Andes of South America and is restricted 

 in its distribution to the western portion of the western continent. 



The following list shows in order of their publication the various 

 genera proposed for species here included in the genus Bromus: 



