19^0] SCHNEIDER, NOTES ON AMERICAN WILLOWS. IX 13 



var. crassijulisj and the typical S. Scouleriana^ but later he apparently 

 changed his mind. 



I do not wish by any means to make a definite statement as to the possi- 

 bility of circumscribing with sufficient accuracy the varieties mentioned. 

 The purpose of my lengthy explanations is only to show how little we really 

 know and how difficult it is to come to a proper understanding of a species 

 like S, Scoidenana. I have seen material from the following states and coun- 

 ties: Alaska (Cook Inlet, Admiralty, Skagway and Guard Island); Yukon 

 Territory (Dawson to Lake Bennett); British Columbia (Vancouver Island, 

 New Westminster, Yale, Kootenay and Cassiar Districts) ; Alberta (Rocky 

 Mountain District); Saskatchewan (Cypress Hills); Washington (San Juan 

 Islands, King, Pierce, Klickitat, Douglas, AVallawalla, Adams, Columbia, Kit- 

 titas, Whitman, Spokane, Whatcom and Chelan Counties); Oregon (Clat- 

 rop, Multnomah, IMorrow, Marion, Polk, Klamath, Coos, ? Jackson and 

 Josephine Counties); California (Humboldt, Siskiyou, Nevada, Plums, 

 Placer, Amador, Madera, Monterey, Santa Clara, Marin, Santa Cruz, Ala- 

 meda, ? Mendocino, Fresno, San Bernardino and Inyo Counties); Montana 

 (Missoula, Deer, Lodge and Gallatine Counties); Wyoming (Yellowstone 

 Park, Fremont, Sweetwater, Sheridan, Crook and Albany Counties) ; 

 South Dakota (La^vTence County); Nevada (Ormsby and ? AVashoe Coun- 

 ties); Colorado (Laramie, Boulder, Clear Creek, Teller, Ouray, Costilla, 

 Montrose and La Plata Counties); New Mexico (Otero, Sierra, Union and 

 Santa Fc Counties), and Arizona (Coconino and Pima Counties). 



3. S. paradoxa Kunth In Humboldt & Bonpland, Nov. Gen. PI. u, 20 

 (1817). — This Mexican species has been dealt with in my first article in 

 Bot. Gaz. Lxv. 35 (1918), It needs further observation, 



4. S. oxylepis Schneider, Bot. Gaz. lxv. 34 (1918). — S. latifolia Mar- 

 tens & Galeotti in Bull. Acad. Brux. x. pt. 1, 344 (1843), non Forbes 

 (1829). — This is another little known Mexican species- 



5. S. Rowleei Schneider in Bot. Gaz. lxv. 81 (1918). — S. cana Rowlee 

 1. c, xxvTi. 137 (1899), pro i)arte, non Martens & Galeotti. — This is a third 

 Mexican species of close relationship to the other two, and like these very 

 badly known. Those three species apparently belong to the same group 

 as S, discolor and arc rather closely related to S, Scouhriana, Not having 

 seen enough material I at present refrain from explaining the differences 

 between the Mexican and northern species. 



b. THE SPECIES OF THE SECTION GRISEAE. 



This section was established by Borrer who referred to it as the only 

 species S. pctiolaris Smith. Barratt enlarged it to contain, in addition to 

 S, pdiolaris, "S. rosviannifoliaJ^.^^ which is S.^er^c^a Marshall; S. coactilis 



Fernald is closely related to the last. The two other species added here: 

 S. Inimilis and S. iridis were placed by Barratt (1840) in his section Cin- 

 ereae which name he used in 1838 (apud Hooker) for species like S. Candida, 

 S, Druvimondiana and others which I have dealt with l^efore. The name. 



