1869.] BOTANY AND ZOOLOGY. 367 



from the Ferns, it beiog the writer's intention to treat them 

 separately. 



D. A. WATT. 



Note on the name Aspidium spinulosum var. dila- 

 TATUM. — Botanists arc at variance as to the personal name 

 which ought to be attached to the scientific name of a plant. 

 The British Association rule is that the author of a species 

 is entitled to have his name always attached to it, no matter 

 in what genus it may thereafter be placed, than which nothing 

 could be fairer or more correct. Linne named a Siberian plant 

 Polypodium fragrans. Roth, finding the Linnean genus Poly- 

 podium to be susceptible of division, separated from it a number 

 of species under the name Polystichum, but, inasmuch as he 

 treated of the plants of Germany only, P. fragrans is not named 

 in his work. Swartz followed Roth ; naming the genus Aspidium, 

 he included the plant in question, calling it Aspidium fragrans. 

 Still later Richard named the same genus Nephrodium, without 

 having occasion to include P. fragrans, it being unknown to 

 him as an American plant when he wrote " Michaux's Flora." 

 We thus have what is practically one genus under three different 

 ninies, and one well understood species, in defining which, by 

 either generic name, we must, under this rule, if we adopt Roth's 

 genus, write thus — Polystichum fragrans (Linn.) ; or, if wo desire 

 to be more precise, Polystichum RaTi Tentamen Fl. Germ. vol. 

 iii. p. 69 — P. fragrans (Linn. Sp. PI. p. 1550). 



Many botanists, however, prefer to attach the name of the 

 author by means of whose works tlie plants referred to have been 

 by them determined, or whose works are generally accessible. 

 Thus Robert Brown, in contributing to '' Richardson's Appendix 

 to Franklin's Journal." refers almost exclusively to the Species 

 Plantarum ot Willdenow, and writes the names of common and 

 well-known Linnean plants thus, — '' Polypodium vuJgare Willd ;'' 

 '■^ Lycopodium Selago Willd." — He even goes so far as to write 

 " Woodsia llvensis Pursh," though he himself est-jblishei the 

 genus Woodsia, and correctly defined by the old Linnean name 

 of llvensis, what had hitherto been a doubtful species. By tliis 

 rule it would be equally correct for us, when determining our 

 plants by means of Dr. Gray's excellent Manual, to write 

 " Woodsia llvensis Gray, Manl. ed. 2nd. p. 596.'' 



