11 
the species. A. pubentissimus was an obscure plant in his day and 
remained so till I studied it in the field and collected abundant 
material of it many years later, We now know that it belongs 
with the Inflati, his Inflati, and not at all with the Argophylli. He 
also placed A. Arthu-Schottii here, but we now know that this is 
only a variety of A. lentiginosus and also belongs with the Inflati. 
The rest of his Argophylli form a well defined group which must 
be recognized but must be extended to contain some of his Phaca 
group, and whose relationship to his Argophylli he clearly saw as 
is shown by their position next to the Argophylli. The Argophylli 
then should contain not only the original species A. Missouriensis, 
Shortianus, Parryi and glareosus (erroneously supposed by Gray 
to be A. argophyllus) but also his Phaca species A. inflexus, the 
true glareosus, Purshii and Utahensis. Very close to this group, 
as we have stated before, is the Mollissimi, and various species discover- 
ed since Gray’s time. 
Taking up series 2, PHACA, we find it subdivided into 11 groups. 
The first group the Eriocarpi does not belong in Phaca at all 
as I have stated, but belongs in Argophylli. 
The second group (Section 18) the Oocarpi contains A. Cooperi 
(neglectus) and oocarpus, two quite diverse species. The first be- 
longs with A. Canadensis as I have stated and is an Astragalus, 
and the second belongs in the Inflati, A. Preussii he places in the 
Scytocarpi and which group is next of kin to the Scytocarpi on the 
one hand and the Inflati on the other. 
The third group (section 19) is the Inflati, a well defined group 
but contains A. frigidus (alpinus) which as I have shown belongs in 
his Astragalus along with A. aboriginum in a group which I have 
named the Alpini. 
The fourth group (Section 20) is the Lonchocarpi with one species 
A. lonchocarpus which is an Astragalus and not a Phaca, having the 
ventral suture not at all produced and belongs next to the Galegiformes. 
His fifth group Section 21) is the Microcystei, all of whose 
species belong in the Inflati. 
The sixth group is the Bisulcati to which he refers A. Beck- 
withii and bisulcatus, two species not at all related. He might much 
better have referred A. Beckwithii to the Sclerocarpi which it 
resembles in many ways, but extensive field work has shown that it 
is closest related to A. oophorus which belongs to the Inflati of Gray 
but connecting with the Preussii. A. bisulcatus is so closely related 
to the Ocreati that it hardly deserves a separate grouping. 
His seventh (Section 23) group is the Pectinati containing A. 
pectinatus only, but which I think is better placed among the Podo- 
sclerocarpi. 
His eigth group is the Scytocarpi, another botanical catchall 
of no merit. Its species are nine. A. Preussii belongs with the 
Preussii, A. Chamaeleuce (pygmaeus) with the Argophylli as also does 
A. tephrodes. A. aridus belongs in his Inflati. A. Sonorae belongs 
with the Homalobi. A. gracilentus, Hallii, Fendleri, and flexuosus 
belong together in a group I have called the Flexuosi, and which 
ranks lowest in the genus along with the Homalobi. 
His ninth group (Section 25) is the Podo-sclerocarpi containinz 
A. sclerocarpus and speirocarpus, which I think belong in separat^ 
£roups, A. sclerocarpus represents a well developed group of desert 
plants containing his Pectinati, Watson's Pterocarpi, and severa! 
other species. A. speirocarpus belongs with A, collinus and Gibbsii, 
Tweedyi, Alvordensis, and porrectus in a separate group which I 
have called the Collini and which is nearest related to the Flexuosi 
on the one hand and the Podo-sclerocarpi on the other. pe 
His tenth group (Section 26) is the Homalobi which he pretty 
clearly defines, though I would place A. collinus in a separate group. 
