CERTAIN BORRAGINACEAE. 545 



synonym E. tenuicaule Phil, in the Flora de Chile, but for some 

 reason the author of that work used the much later E. uliginosum 

 Phil. It is true that the former name is not desirable but since it 

 is perfectly tenable, it must be used. For the complicated synonymy 

 see the Flora de Chile, where Reiche gives the citations of some of the 

 named forms of this rather variable species. 



Allocarya linifolia (Lehm.), comb. nov. — Anchusa linifoliahehm. 

 Asperif. 215, no. 158 (1818). A. oppositifolia & pygmaea HBK. 

 Nov. Gen. et Spec. iii. 91-92 (1818). Krynitzkia linifolia (Lehm.) 

 Gray, Proc. Am. Acad. xx. 266 (1885). From these names of the 

 same date between which priority cannot be determined I have 

 used the name selected by Dr. Gray (1. c.) and have followed his 

 interpretation of the species. Our specimens are from Peru, Ecuador, 

 and Bolivia. 



Allocarya linifolia (Lehm.) Macbr., var. Kunthii (Walp.), 

 comb. nov. — Anchusa Kunthii Walp. Nov. Act. Nat. Cur. xix. 372 

 (1843). Antiphytum Walpersii A. DC. Prod. x. 122 (1846). Eritri- 

 chium Walpersii (A. DC.) Wedd. Chlor. And. ii. 90 (1859). The 

 foliar characters given by the authors cited — the much longer and 

 more uniformly linear leaves — seem to be the only differences between 

 this plant and A. linifolia; the nutlets are the same. 



Eremocarya micrantha (Torr.) Greene, var. lepida (Gray), 

 comb. nov. — Eritrichium viicranihum Torr., var. lepidum Gray, 

 Syn. Fl. ii. pt. 1, 193 (1878). E. lepida (Gray) Greene, Pitt. i. 59 

 (1887). The variety is confluent with the species, as pointed out by 

 Dr. Gray, Proc. Am. Acad. xx. 275 (1885). The nutlet variation is 

 nicely illustrated by Abrams's no. 2904, Aug. 5, 1902, which is typical 

 of the variety as first described except that some of the plants have 

 smooth and lustrous nutlets. The description of the species given 

 in the Synoptical Flora calls for either "smooth and shining or dull 

 and puncticulate-scabrous " fruits. In the type-specimens these are 

 smooth and Dr. Rydberg has segregated those having rough nutlets 

 as E. muricata Rydb. Bull. Torr. Bot. Club, xxxvi. 677 (1909). Un- 

 fortunately a co-type specimen, viz. Parry, no. 164, collected in 1874, 

 has perfectly smooth nutlets. Evidently the character has no spe- 

 cific value in this genus, since the large-flowered plant (var. lepida) 

 shows the same variation, and since herbarium material seems to 

 indicate that the smooth- and rough-fruited forms grow intermingled. 

 Furthermore, if one maintains the rough-fruited form of the small- 

 flowered plant as a species (E. muricata) we need yet another species 

 for the rough-fruited form of the large-flowered plant. 



