THE PROBABLE ORIOIN OF OENOTHERA LAMARCKIANA SER. 587 



SO far as I know. If Poiret's opinion that it bdon^'s to 0. grandi- 

 flora Ait. is correct, then it has evidently not served as a basis for 

 the description of 0. gramiiflora Lam. (0. Lamarckiana Ser.). In 

 0. grandiflora the fruits are thin and relatively large, for example, 

 3 cm. long and 3 mm. wide; while those of 0. Lamarckiana may 

 measure 2 . 5 cm. in length and 6 mm. in width, making a ratio of 

 Y in the one case and t in the other.^) The description of the fruits 

 as short, as given by Lamarck, evidently points to the second and 

 not to the first case. 2) 



Summing up the main results of this discussion, we find that 

 specimen A of the herbarium of Lamarck closely corresponds to 

 the 0. Lamarckiana Ser. of the present time and has been taken 

 by almost all authors for its prototype. The specimen B differs 

 from it in its general aspect, in the words "odore grato" on its 

 label, and in the opinion of Poiret that it belongs to 0. grandi- 

 flora Ait., this opinion pointing to long and narrow fruits. Per- 

 sonally, it impressed me as having been brought into the herbarium 

 of Lamarck only later on, and as having been placed in the cover 

 of 0. grandiflora Lam. with a doubt shown by the placing of the 

 name in brackets. 



The best proof for the fact that A and not B is the authentic 

 specimen of 0. grandiflora Lam. is perhaps given by the specimen in 

 the herbarium of Father Pourret, which was given to the Museum 

 d'Histoire Naturelle by Dr. Barbier in 1847.3) n bears the name 

 Oenothera grandiflora Lam. written in the clear and beautiful hand- 

 writing of the clerk of Pourret. In the same cover there is another 

 sheet of Pourret's collection, on which the same clerk wrote 

 Oenothera biennis. Unfortunately, Davis, who did not visit the 

 Museum, has mistaken this one for the one studied by me,*) and 



i) \J OenotJiera grandiflora de I'herbier de Lamarck, p. 576, fig. i, b and c. 



2) Davis (op. cit. p. 523) lays great stress on the tips of the sepals, 

 but 1 cannot find a well defined difference between the two species in 

 this character. He calls attention to the word "sctacc" in Lamarck's 

 description of the sepal tips: "this has been translated by De Vries 

 (Mutations-Theone, p. 317, iQOi) as "dicke." The French, however, 

 is from the late Latin word seiaceus, derived from "seta," a stiff hair 

 or bristle. The meaning, therefore, is exactly the opposite of that given 

 by De Vries." If the reader will kindly look up my book at the page- 

 quoted by Davis, he will find that I have translated "setacr" by "faden- 

 formig." 



3) The Mutation Theory, Engl. ed. 1:442, note 2. 



4) Bull. Torr. Bot. Club, op. cit, p. 527. 



