CONTRIBUTIONS TO WESTERN BOTANY NO. 16 



the same root except the var. caespitosa, and it never has a trunk. Y. Whip- 

 plei and elata both have long peduncles and erect and dry fruit, and elata 

 also has a trunk. But Mohavensis, macrocarpa, baccata, Schottn and 

 hrevifolia have sessile panicle. The last two and the first have trunks only. 



I do not think that much stress should be laid on the color of the leaves 

 in the Mohavensis group, for we have growing in Claremont a tree of Y. 

 Schotti with leaves just the shape, color, and length (3 feet) of Mohavensis 

 but destitute of the marginal threads. No botanist would class the other 

 tree Yucca (J. brevifolia) with this group with sessile panicles because of 

 the thick petals and nauseating odor of the flowers, though the pods are erect 

 and dry and in s3e panicles. 



Yucca marcrocarpa Eng. Bot. Gaz. 6 224 Wooten and Standley 

 give as the proper citation Mex. Bound Torrey 221, but there is no such 

 species described on that page. It should be 222, where the name occurs 

 as a variety of Y. baccata. I do not think the name of Torrey should be 

 considered 'at all for there is no adequate description of the species there, 

 v. >.v does Em;elmann refer at all to Torrey's plant in his description of V 

 macrocarpa. In addition to recognize I" ;ilt >% Santa Kita 



iponntpins \rizoiv h. c vn\< uives one an exact opinion of the species, 

 \ ■ i'.. . l r of tt! -n -: I". : ' , r the Limpio is a very vague description, 

 of The tvue locality. Then there is a great variation between the plains 

 -peri; s and the canon species, and it is an open question whether they are 

 il.es ? me. If w, Yuccas we must 



con^h- En-eim-nn-. V ^ Y. Schottn, which name 



~M.Cs hxl m -ph q i £ Iii- [.lain cvh«ttn) is common in the moun- 

 1 does not seem to extend down 

 ) a part of the 

 it tne macrocarpa of 

 F.n K elmann is perfectly de* ri!.,d nd ui-i^ive. The chief difference lies 

 the Lilaucous-given leaves of Sch< : ' ] i fll, " s or ven 



t. v, and very fine ones, and a tomentose panicle, and excessively large fruit, 

 which is fleshy, edible, and pendent. 



Now what shall we do with the Yucca baccata var. macrocarpa of lor 

 rev? Coville is the first one to erect this into a species, callimi it \ua a 

 marcrocarpa (Torr.) Coville. Ordinarily the previon- (to ( oville s nan. ■ 

 M.hlirntion of Engelmann's macrocarpa would invalidate any later species 

 by the same name But I think any varietal name should hold precedence 

 over any other name proposed. This would invalidate Engelmann s nam* 

 • in this case it comes in quite handily. Then as to th<> 



macrocarpa. Coville of course did 



' published his macrocarpa, for he intended it to apply to 



plant which Sargent 



But Covin. • 



; Torrev's tvoe to be macrocarpa. 

 'What was Torrey's type?" Torrey says the leaves are those of ftacc 



I the pod itt'l, W, t r i tl ^ i out all there is to the descript] 

 •■xcept that it is a -mall tree. Standley (F 

 that the leaves are yellowish-green, but tl 



by inference 

 haracter he does not 

 v are fine «r coarse. 



