[Pkoc. Roy. Soc. Victoria, 32 (N.S ), Pt. 11., 1920.] 



Art. X\'. — A revision of the genus Fultenaea, Fart 1. 



BY. H. B. WILLIAMSON. 



(With Plates XIII., XlV. aud XV.). 

 [Keacl November 6th, 1919J. 



It is only uatui'al that in large genera more confusion is likely 

 to occur than in small ones, and some time ago Professor Ewart 

 advised me that a general revision of the genus Pultenaea would 

 probably yield protitable results, and was indeed urgently neces- 

 sary. Ihe results of the first part of this investigation, based on 

 the examination of the material at the National Herbarium. Mel- 

 bourne, and of specimens received from the Government Botanists 

 of the other States, are here given. 



The genus Pultenaea is confined to Australia, and comprisenS 92 

 acknowledged species. Seventy-five species are described in Ben- 

 tham's Flora Australiensis, two of which have been transferred to 

 other genera, and one reduced to a variety. The species since 

 described number 20, comprising those set up by Mueller (3). Tate 

 (2), Black (2), Maiden (3), Maiden and Betche (2). Bailey (1), 

 Baker (2), Scott (I), Andrews (1), Pritzel (1). and Hegel (1). No 

 labelled, specimen of either of the last three is in the Herbarium. 



The approximate distribution is — Queensland, 11 species; New 

 South Wales, 45; Victoria, 37; Tasmania, 13; South Australia, 22;. 

 and Western Australia, 22. 



About half of the species are confined to one State; about 20 are 

 recorded for two States, 10 for three States, and 6 species are 

 widely spread — -four States. As with other genera,, few of the 

 Western Australian species — two — occur east of the limits of that 

 State, one of which extends to South-West Victoi'ia. It is worthy 

 of note that in the Flora of the Northern Teri-itory, Ewart and 

 Davies, 1017, the genus is not mentioned, and that very few records 

 of Pultenaea exist for Western Australia outside the south-western 

 district of tliat State. 



While attenq^ting a revision of the genus in which, judging by 

 evidence of labelled and unlabelled specimens in the National 

 Herbarium, much confusion exists, it is not claimed that finality 

 can now be reached with regard to certain groups, for the occur- 

 rence of forms that seem to connect the members of those groups 

 presents mucli difficulty. Considering the varying forms for 

 example, of tht group known under Eupultenaea, an advocate for 



