15 
changed it to Phaca. Medic proposed several segregations in 1787. 
Glandula, Glottis, Hamosa, Onix, Stella, Tium and Triquetra Aragallus 
and Spiesia were proposed by Necker in 1790 but without description of 
species. Steudel proposed Aragus for the Aragallus of Necker in 1840, 
and Thium in 1821. Steven in 1832 proposed Ammodytes, chondrocar- 
pus, Cymbicarpus, Euprepia, Glyciphylla, Picraena, Proselias, Psychri- 
dium, Rysodium. In 1856 he again continued the disintregration by 
proposing Ailurischia, Alopecias, Ankylobus, Craccina, Cystium, Euilus 
Feidanthus, Hedyphylla, Macrosema, Myobroma, Pedina, Philammos, 
Solenotus. Torrey and Gray published Nuttall’s Kentrophyta in 1840 
also Homalobus Nutt. Walpers put out Aurosema in 1842, Boissier pro- 
posed Europhaca about 1840, Opiz proposed Kirchnera in 1858, also 
medyphylla, Royle proposed Podolanthus in 1835. Regel & Smalh. Pro- 
posed Didymopelta, Sewerzowia, and Dipelta in 1877. Diplotheca was 
proposed by Hochst in 1846. Hamaria was proposed by Fourrnier in 
1868 and also Hypoglottis and Podochrea, Rafinesque also earned a 
place in the segregators by Physondra in 1832. Rydberg seems to have 
failed to note that this genus antedates Homalobus by eight years. 
So we shall see a new batch of synonyms in due time. 
Recently Rydberg harking back to the ancient times has resur- 
rected the old genera and methods of segregaticn s> long dead throuzh 
the good work of Gray and Bentham & Hooker and the Pflanzenfa- 
milien. Gray demonstrated conclusively the folly of attempting to 
segregate the species of Astragalus in different genera, and he has been 
almost universally followed both in this country and abroad. He saw 
the folly of keeping up the form genera Kentrophyta and Homalobus 
as well as Phaca which latter had persisted longest, He stil ad- 
hered to Oxytropis which can be kept up only on the flimsiest grounds, 
that of an abruptly beaked keel, and he should have added enlarged and 
most lobed wings. A few species of Astragalus have an obscure boss 
at keel tip, and even a rudiment of beak, such as A. acutirostris 
and nothoxys, and others have produced keel as in campestris, atra- 
tus, etc. with normal wings, and A. Arizonicus with lobed or en- 
larged wings, and A. calycosus with conspicuously lobed wings and 
blunt keel. But it seems better to follow Gray in still keeping up 
Oxytropis than to merge it in Astragalus, for its species as a rule 
have a general habit somewhat different from Astragalus if we ex- 
clude the oxytropidoid species, but with them in the genus it must 
be merged. 
Britton € Brown in their Flora proposed Orophaca in 1897 for 
the group Triphylli of Gray, without recognizing the very diverse 
character of its members. There might be some reason in keeping 
up Orophaca for A. triphyllus alone but to put the sericoleucus 
group with it spoils it, as these plants are manifestly modifications 
of the montanus group. 
The proposed genera of Rydberg are mostly the product of his 
idea that no genus should contain more than six species whatever 
Nature may have said or done about it, which is rather hard on the 
Almighty, but where genera and species are governed by botanical 
inspiration and not study or morphological knowledge this state of 
affairs make strange bed fellows. 
Taking up Rydberg’s genera alphabetically we find Atelophragma 
proposed for a part of the Alpini. In it are A. aboriginum, Forwoodii 
(aboriginum) glabriusculus, lineare (aboriginum), elegans, Macounii 
(Labradoricus var.), Shearii (elegans). These belong together but 
he also includes A. Arthuri which belongs in the Hamosi, and A. 
Prandegei which belongs in the Strigulosi, and A. Ibapensis which 
belongs in the Atrati. He also omits from the genus the other mem 
bers of the Alpini. 
His next genus is Cnemidophacos, which contains A., argillosus, 
confertiflorus, flavus, which naturally belong together (as indicated 
by Gray under the Ocreati) but he omits A. Moencoppensis and soph- 
oroides, and puts in it A. terminalis (reventoides) which belongs in 
- «the Uliginosi, and A. reventus which belongs in the Reventi-arrecti. 
