264 GRONOYIUS'S 'FLORA VIRGINICA.' 



(C. B. C.) — illecehrum De Not. Amhlystegium serpens (C. B. C.) 



(H. E.) — puriim'Dixon{G.'B.C.) Hypyium ripariiim L. (H. R.) — 



Eurhynchium inliferum B. & S. stel}at2imYa>T, protensum ^. & S. 



(H.F. P.) — crassinerviumld.&^. (H. F. P.) — adunciim var. 



(Miss Armitage). — pircBlonyum. Kneiffii Schp. (H. F. P.) — 



B. & S. (C. B. C.) — Sivartzii cupressiforme L. (C. B. C.) — 



Hobk. (C. B. C.) — viyosuroides Var. resupinatnm Schp. (C. B. 



Schp. (C. B. C.) — striatum C.) — inolluscmii Hedw. (C. 



^. k '^. {G.Jj.C.] — striatuluin B. C.) — cuspidatum L. (H. 



B. & S. (C. B. C.) — rusciforme R.) 



Milde (H. F. P.) — confertum Hijlocomium splendens B. & S. (C. 



Milde (H.R.) B. C.) — squarrosiim B. & S. 



Plagiothechim denticulatuw B. &S. (H. R.) — trlquetrum B. & S. 



(H. R.) — sylvaticum B. & S. (C. B. C.) 



(C.B.C.) 



BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTES. 

 XV. — Gronovius's 'Flora Virginica.' 



It has been generally understood that the descriptions of new 

 plants in the Flora Virginica were based, not upon the biblio- 

 graphical references to previous authors, but upon the specimens 

 collected by Clayton. It is true that these are cited after the 

 synonymy, where such exists, but the title of the book seems to 

 make it abundantly clear that Clayton's plants are the types of the 

 descriptions. It runs thus: "Flora Virginica exhibens plantas 

 quas V. c. Johannes Clayton in Virginia observavit atque collegit. 

 Easdem Methodo Sexuali disposuit, ad Genera propria retulit, 

 Nominibus specificis insignivit, et minus cognitas descripsit Joh. 

 Fred. Gronovius." It is of course well known that Clayton's 

 specimens were acquired by Banks — they are entered in Dryander's 

 Catalogue (iii. 186) as "specimina sicca Claytoniana (ex herbario 

 J. F. Gronovii) qu^ adornand?e huic flora9 [i. e. Flora Virginica] 

 inservierunt " — and they are now incorporated with the general 

 herbarium at the British Museum. 



It would appear, however, that the importance of Clayton's 

 plants as types of many Linnean species is at present in danger of 

 being overlooked by the younger American botanists. Two in- 

 stances of this have just come under my notice ; and I propose 

 to offer a few remarks upon the subject, as at the same time it 

 gives me an opportunity of once more calling attention to other 

 existing early types. 



1. ASCLEPIAS verticillata L. 



Miss A. M. Vail, in the course of her " Studies in the Asclepi- 

 adace^e,"* rightly points out that " this species was based on 

 Asclepias foliis verticillatis lineari-setaceis Gronovius, Virg. 26 (1739)." 

 She proceeds, however, to say that Gronovius's plant was "in its 



* Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, April, 1898, 174. 



