﻿Rydberg: Notes on Rosaceae 131 



. This is the best species of Batidaea proposed by Greene. It is 

 characterized by the toothing of the leaves and by the fact 

 that the leaves of the floral branches are usually pinnately 5- 

 foliolate, while in all the other species they are, as a rule, 3-foliolate 



Arizona: Fly Peak, Blumer 1260; Jones 6os6d; San Fran- 

 cisco Mountains, MacDougal 258, 373; Tourney 116; Pearson 32Q; 

 Coville J125, 1054; Wooton; Leiherg 5756; Santa Catalina Moun- 

 tains, Livingston &' Thornber; Huachuca Mountains, Goodding 

 145^ 325- 



New Mexico: Standley 770$, 6707, 6138; Goldman 1672, 

 1598; MogoUon Mountains, Metcalfe 373; Hillsboro Peak, Black 

 Range, Metcalfe 1202; Chloride, 1909, Goldman 1759; Capitan 

 Mountains, 1903, Grant 76; Winsor's Ranch, 1908, Standley 4090. 



Chihuahua : Colonia Garcia, Townsend & Barber 87. 



Rubus strigosus Michx. To my mind there is no doubt that 

 this species is specifically distinct from R. idaeus L. Fernald in 

 discussing the occurrence of R. idaeus anomalus Arrh. in America* 

 treated also of the relationship of R. strigosus and R. idaeus and 

 made the statement: "Upon this character — the presence or ab- 

 sence of glands — rests the separation of the American Rubus stri- 

 gosus and the European R. idaeus.'' While this is the most strik- 

 ing difference, it is not the only one. R. idaeus never has glands, 

 R. strigosus is exceedingly rarely, if ever, without some trace of 

 glands of some kind. The prickles in the inflorescence and on the 

 petioles of R. idaeus, although weak, nearly always are somewhat 

 flattened and slightly curved. This is never the case in R. 

 strigosus. If the latter is without glands, it is without prickles 

 and bristles. In Rubus idaeus the young stems, rachis and 

 petioles of the leaves, peduncles and pedicels are more or less 

 finely tomentulose. This is not the case in the typical eastern 

 R. strigosus. In the high northern plant {Batidaea subarctica 

 Greene), which has been included in R. strigosus, the inflorescence 

 is pubsecent but not of the fine character found in R. strigosus. 

 Fernald claims that the American plant sometimes is without 

 glands, and cites two specimens, John Macoun 4550 and Rydberg 

 657. I have not seen the former, but there are specimens of 



