22 i CONTRIBUTIONS TO WESTERN BOTANY NO. IS 



J 



stratrurensis he gives as plains and hillsides. It grows only 

 in canons. A. eremiticus he gives as a synonym of A. 



eastern Oregon, and not Utah or Arizona. A. asclepiadoides he gives as 

 growing on-'plains and foothills of the artemisia and pinion belts, when it 

 ows only on alkaline areas in the juniper belt. A. sabulosus he gives 

 as a synonym of A. procerus Gray, when it is not, and gives its ranje 

 as the Covillea and artemisia belts of Utah and Arizona to California, 

 when it grows only in Utah, near Moab. The A. procerus of Gray is a 

 f omt of A, Pattersoni and grows so fas as now known only in the vicinity 

 of St George and Zion canon, Utah. A. Preussii he makes as a synonym 

 ofc'A.vMokiacensis, which is' not. A. remulcus he gives as of the yellow 

 piiie belt in Arizona, when it belongs in the Juniper belt. A. Zionis Jones 

 he gives as of the artemisia and pinion belts of Utah, when it is found 



Utah. It grows only on 



only on ledges of Zion canon. A. cymboides Jo 

 ;md hillsides of the artemisia and pinion belts, 

 pinSns in the juniper belt. A. peterocarpus he 



c;nd hillsides, when it is found only on the alkaline flat of the Humboldt 

 ripr. A, Purshii var. tinctus he gives as a possible s}^onym for A. 

 funereus, which it is not. A. debilis he gives as ranging to the Yukon, 

 which it 'does not. He keeps up the fictitious A. Garrettii (of Rydberg), 

 which is onlv a form of A. tenelliis. H^ nUr 



blunders in makin 



same 



o 



tJrae of publication I mistook A. lancearius for another species, but later 

 on I had a chance to study the plant growing abnudantly. He gives A. 

 f!exno3U3 as growing in Utah, when it does not. He fails to see the 



A. Gibbssii. 



form 



speirocarpus 



hillsides, when it grows on sand dunes only. He keeps up such fictitious 

 jpecies as A. tegetariiis, which is only a form of A. montanus. He omifs 

 a number of species such as A. Oreganus, A. terminalis, Mohavensis 

 acutirostris; etc. His whole work shows little real study of a critical 

 kind, "and very little knowledge of localities or life zones. 



Taking the Cactaceae we find him adopting the recent work of Rose 



re- 



nobody adopts. The same loose 



pol 



the artemisia and coviDea belts, Nevada and California, which is utterly 

 vague. The fact is that the species grows only in the covillea area of 

 southwestern Nevada, south of Goldfield, and in the Death Valley region 

 of California. He does not mention E. polycephalus at all, thou<rh it is 

 common. He gives Echiriocactus Johnsoni Parry as Johnsonii, but has 

 not tW slightest idea of where and how it grows. He says "desert areas 

 canons, and dry hillsides of the Covillea and artemisia belts, southen^ 

 Ftah and Arizona." Now desert areas is all right for the whole region 

 of the west is desert, canons is all right, for the region in the mountains 

 1^- mo^ly canons and ndgcs; dry hillsides is all right, for all the hill- 

 siTer, flre-.do'. ' But, what does it all mean to a botanist Notliincr wort^i 



