16 Rydberg : Studies on the Rocky Mountain flora 



combining characters of both. Either the two genera should be 

 united or else this species and several others of the southwestern 

 United States and Mexico should be separated as a distinct genus. 

 Even Fries in his Symbolae Hieraciorum recognized this fact 

 and suggested the name Crepidispermum. He did not exactly 

 publish the genus and no binomial names were given under the 

 genus. Besides, in the same year a genus Crepidospermiim B. & H. 

 was published. The two names differ only in one letter, the 

 connecting vowel i in one case and o in the other. The former is 

 the Latin connecting vowel, the latter the Greek, which is some- 

 times used in Latin for euphony's sake. The two names may 

 therefore be regarded as identical. The two brothers Schultz of 

 Zweibruecken adopted Fries' suggestion and established the 

 genus under the name Heteropleura, as alternate ribs of the 

 achenes are stronger. The present species was given the name 

 Heteropleura amhigua, based on Crepis amhigua A. Gray. As there 

 is an older C. amhigua Balb., that specific name is not available, 

 and hence I have adopted Heteropleura Fcndleri. 



Agoseris 



Professor Nelson reestablishes the name Troximon for this 

 genus, evidently following as he thought the Vienna Rules and 

 cites Nuttall' as authority for the genus. This is a similar case 

 to that of Actinella and Tetraneuris. In fact Nuttall never estab- 

 lished a genus Troximon. He thought that his two species be- 

 longed to the genus Troximon Gaert. Troximon of Gaertner 

 was established in 1791 on Tragopogon Dandelion, T. virginicum, 

 and T. lanatum,oi which the first two belong to one genus, Krigia 

 or Adopogon, and the last is a Scorzonera. Even if Nuttall had 

 established a genus Troximon, this would not hold, for then it 

 was not published before 181 8 in his Genera, while Ralinesque's 

 name dates from 181 7. It is true that Troximon appeared in 

 Fraser's Catalogue of 1813, but there it is without description. 

 In his Genera, Nuttall credits Gaertner with the name. So does 

 also Pursh in his Flora, 1814. There is therefore no w^arrant for 

 reviving Troximon for the genus known in later years as Agoseris. 



A good deal may be said regarding Professor Nelson's treat- 

 ment of this genus, especially in the way synonyms have been 



