Rydberg: Notes on Rosaceae 165 



it is unique in the group on account of its densely glandular- 

 bristly pedicels. It evidently is a good species unless of hybrid 

 origin. It might have been produced by R. Nutkana and R. 

 gymnocarpa. 



Oregon: Yainax Indian Reservation, Mrs. Austin. 



California: Crescent City, Del Norte County, 1912, Eastwood 

 2270. 



12. Rosa Nutkana Presl 



Although an easily distinguished species (except from the two 

 next following species), it has been mistaken for R. fraxinifolia 

 (i.e. R. blanda) and R. Woodsii. It has also been named R. caryo- 

 carpa Dougl. and R. Lyalliana Crepin; but these names have not 

 been published, except in synonymy. 



13. Rosa muriculata Greene 



This is closely related to R. Nutkana and is perhaps not distinct. 

 It differs in the thicker and smaller leaves, densely glandular- 

 muricate beneath, and in the often corymbose inflorescence. 

 As it is more common on the Vancouver Island than the pre- 

 ceding species, there may be a possibility that it is the original 

 R. Nutkana Presl. In such a case the plant known as that species 

 would be without a published name. 



14. Rosa Spaldingii Crepin 



This has been confused with R. Nutkana but differs in the 

 simple-toothed leaflets, which are decidedly pubescent but scarcely 

 at all glandular-granuliferous beneath. Dr. Watson merged it in 

 R. Nutkana, and this fact probably influenced Crepin to withdraw 

 his species. The plant had been recognized before: Borrer in 

 Hooker's Flora included it in R. cinnamomea, which it approaches 

 more than any other American species does, differing principally 

 in the longer and straight prickles; Nuttall recognized it as a 

 species, R. megacarpa, but this name was published only as a 

 synonym in Torrey & Gray's Flora; in the meantime Rafinesque 

 had published it as R. macrocarpa Nutt. It is common through 

 the northern Rockies as well as the Cascades. 



