GENERA CONFUSED UNDER BRODLEA. 127 



firm texture and not inflated, and the filaments, stout and 

 angular, are prominent upon the wall of the tube, down ta 

 its very base, being attached only by one of the sides or 

 angles. This last named character I discovered in the field,, 

 but am able henceforth to trace it even in the dried speci- 

 mens. In the first named group the volubility of the scapes 

 is the most striking outward mark of a genus; but it is 

 very apt to disappear before the specimens are ready for the 

 herbarium; and the one unlucky species whose stalk does- 

 not altogether untwist itself in drying has, by closet bot- 

 anists, been forced away from its less strongly twining rela- 

 tives, and must henceforth labor bibliographically under 

 the weight of at least four generic synonyms, of which 

 Macroscapa is barbarous, Rupalleya and Dichelostemma in 

 good form, Siropholirlon admirably chosen, but all equally 

 uncalled for. 



The confusion of the two genera whose respective 

 limits I have thus briefly and informally indicated, was 

 begun bv tlie very first author, Salisbury, to whom any of 

 the species were known; and it was continued by his con- 

 temporary Smith. The renowned author of the Enumeratio 

 Plantarum was first to recognize in the species of Smith's 

 Brodkea two distinct generic types. I was long under the 

 impression that Kunth's name, Dichelostemma, would have 

 to be continued for one of these two genera- Of the priority 

 of Salisbury's Hookera over Brodlcea I was not aware until 

 that fact was so clearly brought out, less than a year ago, 

 by Mr. Britten, editor of the London Journal of Botany, 

 and this important circumstance being recognized, it does 

 not appear necessary to take up the name Dichelostemma; 

 for, the plant which Salisbury brought forward as the type 

 of Hookera, namely H. coromtvia, being of one genus and 

 tliat which Smith figured as the type of Brodkea, that is, 

 B. congesta, representing the other, I see no reason why 

 both these generic names ought not to be continued in use. 



But, Brodkea and Hookera, as thus outlined, will include 



