37 



X. stricta, Chapm, is undoubtedly the same as X. amhigiia. 

 Dr. Chapman speaks of the leaves of the former as being rough- 

 edged, while those of the latter are smooth. I am unable to find 

 such a difference. Again the heads of ambigua are said to be 

 oblong, ovate-lanceolate or acute, while those of stricta are ob- 

 long or cylindric. The heads of ambigua are often obtuse and 

 cylindric, while those of stricta are sometimes acute. I can find 

 no constant difference in the shape of the sepals. 



In X. rho7iibipetala, Sauv. the shape of the sepal and whole 

 form of the plant are the same as in ambigua. 



North Carolina. — Wilmington, W. M. Canby. 



South Carolina. — Society Hill, M. A. Curtis; Sumter Co. J. 

 D. Smith. 



Florida. — Apalachicola, A. H. Curtiss, No. 3,002 ; Walton 

 Co., A. H. Curtiss, No. 16; Chapman. 



Texas. — Wright, Herb. Harvard Coll.; Hempstead, E. Hall, 

 No. 671 ; Hardin Co., G. C. Nealley (1884); Austin, F. Rugel. 



4. Xyris FLEXUOSA, Muhl. 



X.jupicai, Michx. Fl. Bor. Amer. i. 23 (1803). ? 



X.flexHOsa, Miihl. Cat. 5 (18 13). 



X. bulbosa, Kunth, Enum. iv. 11. (1843). 



X. scabra, Engelm. Mss. in Herb. Col. Coll. 



Scape twisted, straight or spiral, two-edged above ; root 

 somewhat bulbous; leaves linear, twisted; spike globose, few 

 flowered ; lateral sepals linear, curved, fringed the whole length 

 of the wingless keel. 



New Hampshire. — Jefferson Highlands, T. G. White. 



Connecticut. — Waterford, W. H. Leggett; New Haven, in 

 Herb. Harv. Coll. 



Rhode Island. — Providence, S. T. Olney. 



Massachusetts. — Salem, J. W. Chickering, Jr. 



New York. — Herkimer Co., J. A. Paine ; Cold Spring, Long 

 Island, H. Ries. 



New Jersey. — A. Gray ; Atlantic Co., C. F. Parker. 



Pennsylvania. — Chester Co., in Herb. W. M. Canby (1865); 

 C. W. Short (1842). 



Delaware. — Newcastle, Herb. W. M. Canby. 



Maryland. — Stockton, H. H. Rusby. 



District of Columbia. — Washington, L. F. Ward ; Holmead 

 Swamp, G. Vasey. 



