BOTANICAL NEW8. 221 



modern sense ; some writers even quote the classical authors as 

 authorities for genera now in scientific use, and many go back at 

 least to Tournefort and Micheli. Without entering here into the 

 merits of this question, it is sufficient to call attention to the practice 

 of the present authors, who draw the line at the period of Linnaeus. 

 This would make their starting-point the publication of the " Systeraa 

 Naturae," in which Linnaeus first gave the narae^ of his genera. We 

 do not, however, find this book (1735) actually quoted by the authors, 

 who are usually content to give merely the number of the genus in 

 " Linn. Gen." But as no less than six editions of this book were 

 issued during the life of its author — the first dated 1737 — it would 

 appear quite necessary to quote in each case the edition referred 

 to. 



Between 1735 and 1778 (the date of Linnaeus's death) a large 

 number of local systematic Floras and memoirs arranged on the 

 Linnaean principles were printed, and to the new genera published iu 

 these the ordinary rules of scientific priority should be applied in 

 relation to the Linnaean ones. It is probable that a systematic ex- 

 amination of these would result in several alterations in genus-nomen- 

 clature. Take the following, referring to a British plant, as an 

 example. In 1762 our countryman, Hudson, founded the genus 

 Blackstonia (Flora Anglica, ed. i., p. 146) for our yellow Centaury, 

 the Gentiana perfoliata of Linnaeus. Five years later, in 1767, 

 Linnaeus himself (Mantissa i., p. 10, and Syst. Nat., ed. xii., p. 267) 

 also made the plant a genus, and took up Reneaulme's name, published 

 in 1611. Of course, if we are to recognise such ancient names as 

 truly generic in the modern sense, Blaclcstonia, Hudson, must yield to 

 Chlora, Keneaulme ; but to take up the name " Chlora, Linn.," as is 

 done in the " Genera Plantarum," p. 809, must be incorrect in the 

 face of the earlier name of Hudson. 



For the history of generic names we are fortunate in possessing 

 such a book as the extremely careful and complete " Nomenelator 

 Botanicus " of Dr. Pfeiff'er, which commences with Tournefort (1700) 

 and extends to the end of 1858 only. It very usefully supplements the 

 " Genera Plantarum " in thelatter's weak point, and the two together 

 give nearly all the information about genera that we can want. 



H. T. 



53otanicai ^tSi^^. 



Articles in Jouenals.— Mat. 



Botanische Zeitung. — W. Velten, " On true plant-electricity." — P. 

 Ascherson, " On Galium pedemontanum.'" — Id., " Further remarks on 

 Malaguetta- or Melegueta-pepper.' 



Hedwigia. — O. Nordstedt, "Remarks on the Desmidieae in 

 Heinsch's ' Contrib. ad Algol, et FungoL' " — H. F. Bonorden, " Myco- 

 logy " (contd.). 



Flora. — W. Velten, " Influence of temperature on protoplasm - 

 movements " (contd.). — N. W. P. Rauwenhoff",/' Ishorny-prosenchyma 

 a special form of plant-tissue ? " — A. de Krempelhuber, *' Lichenes 



