cis), 
some cases single species) that could be better comprehended ‘as a 
hose parts were more nearly related than to any 
others, or sets of groups that formed a composite whole clearly 
separable from the nearest related groups. We need not con- 
it all in adapting plants to their environment of today and through- 
out geologic time.. The former method is unscientific and vicious, 
parison, very rarely can any botanist hold five and it is almost 
none at all v ho can hold seven. This fact has led our best sys- 
tematists to devise elaborate keys for tracing up genera and 
keys. This is particularly true of Rydberg’s Flora of Colorado, 
Piper’s Flora of Washington and Jepson’s Flora of California. 
This is all well enough when there is one prominent character, 
but many times a species or genus does not rest on any one ¢ ar- 
acter but on a combination of several, and therefore the key is 
not only worthless but worse than worthless, and wholly mislead- 
he acta oh ae si Hee eae ies of the genus in 
i ; e spec 
edeopbeint os paisa he oe hand with the keys 
h 
easy and at the same time the genetic relationship 1s indicated by 
the position. Even this is not always possible in a ucigcral 
rangement where there are two groups, co-ordinate, branching 
