1921] REHDER. NEW SPECIES, VARIETIES AND COMBINATIONS 35 



As Schneider points out (111. Handb. Laubholzk. n. 32), the oldest 

 name for the plant generally known as G. triangularis Willd. will be G. 



cxxxiv 



II of vol. Ill of his Species plantarum appeared in 1803 is true. Parts 



II and in of this work have no title-page only part I has a title-page dated 

 1800, which, however, should be according to Kuntze 1801. As part i 

 of volume IV is dated 1805, I see no reason to doubt the correctness of 

 Kuntze's statement taken from Kayser's Biicherlexikon (H-L 1835), for 

 it is reasonable to assume that the publication of part n and in of vol. 



III came between the publication of part i of vol. Ill and part i of vol. 



IV and that these parts were not published in the same year as part i 

 of vol. III. Viviani's Elenchus the preface of which is dated July 2 

 1802 was probably published soon after that date as it is an octavo of 

 only 36 pages. 



Cytisus scoparius Lk. f. plenus, nom. nov. — C. scoparius 3. Hore 

 pleno Hort. apud Loudon, Arb. Brit. n. 595 (1838). 



The origin of this slightly double form is not known to me. I have 

 been unable to find any mention of it before 1838 and Loudon says nothing 

 of its origin. 



Lk. f. erniensis. var. nov. — Sarothamnus erniensis 



Cytisus scoparius Lk. f. erniensis, var. nov- 

 A. Chevalier in Bull. Soc. Bot. France, lxvii. 324 (1921). 



This form differs from C. scoparius f. Andreanus Dippel in having all 

 the petals changed to a bright red color. Both forms originated from a 

 plant found about or probably before 1870 in France near Ern6e (May- 

 enne). More detailed information about the origin of these two forms is 

 given by Chevalier in the publication cited above. 



Cytisus glabrescens Sartorelli, Alb. Indig. Ital. Sup. 282 (1816). — C. 



cmeriflorus Reichenbach, Fl. Germ. Excurs. 524 (1832). — Genista glabres- 

 cens Briquet, £tudes Cytis. Alp. Marit. 123 (1894). 



Schinz & Thellung (in Bull. Herb. Boiss. s&\ 2 VII. 188 [1907].) and 

 Schneider (111. Handb. Laubh. n. 45 [1907].) have rejected the name C. 

 glabrescens Sartorelli and taken up instead C. emeriflorus on account of 

 the older homonym C. glabrescens Schrank (Baier, Fl. 269) of 1789 but 

 that is without doubt a straight synonym of C. scoparius Link and is there- 

 fore not valid. In reading Schrank's description carefully, one will 



find that it agrees exactly with C. scoparius Link except that the leaves 

 are described as shorter than the petioles, but this is apparently a slip 

 of the pen; instead of "petioles (Blattstiele)" he must have meant "pedi- 

 cels (Bluthenstiele)." In literature Schrank's name seems to have been 

 either overlooked or treated as a doubtful name. 



Cyt 



C. microphallus Bois- 



sier, Diagn. Fl. Or. ser. 2, n. 5 (1857). — C. austriacus var. microphallus 

 Boissier, Fl. Or. n. 53 (1892). — C. leucanthus var. microphallus Boissier, 

 Fl. Or. Suppl. 161 (1888). — C. supinus subsp. albus var. microp/ujlloides 



