RypDBERG: Notes oN ROSACEAE 495 
and shows many affinities to the ConcrnNag, although it lacks 
tomentum. 
Potentilla maculata and P. Langeana are closely related. Dr. 
Wolf adopts the name P. alpestris for the former, claiming that 
the name P. maculata Pourr. probably belongs to P. pyrenaica 
Ram. He does not, however, adopt the name P. maculata for 
the latter, although the name is much older. Dr. Wolf does not 
admit P. Langeana as a distinct species. 
The rest of my AUREAE group are closely related. Potentilla 
Vreelandit Rydb. was first described in the North American Flora, 
and was consequently unknown to Dr. Wolf. 
Potentilla diversifolia Lehm. is placed in the MULTIJUGAE group 
by Dr. Wolf, and under it he recognizes four varieties: genuina, 
decurrens, glaucophylla, and jucunda. It is true that P. diverst- 
folia often has at least some of the leaves pinnate, although with 
closely approximate pairs of leaflets, and that it connects the 
MULTIJUGAE and the AUREAE groups. The forms regarded as 
varieties of it by Dr. Wolf have digitate leaves. 
Concerning Potentilla glaucophylia Lehm., first described as a 
species and afterwards reduced to a variety of P. diversifolia by 
the author himself, it may be said that although it is very close 
to some forms of P. diversifolia, especially when they bear only 
digitate leaves, it seems to be more different in the living state 
than in dried material, and Professor Aven Nelson,* who also has 
had chance to study them in the field agrees with me in regarding 
them as distinct. 
That Dr. Wolf reduced Potentilla jucunda to a variety is 
probably due to the fact that he had received unusually large 
specimens of P. glaucophylla which were labeled P. jucunda. 
See the remarks in my preceding Notes on Rosaceae. 
What I actually described and figured in my monograph of 
Potentilla as Potentilla decurrens, was not the same as P. dissecta 
decurrens of S. Watson. My description was, however, made 
broad enough to include Watson's plant. In 1905, while collecting 
in Utah, I collected at several places a plant which I regarded as 
a new species. A closer comparison with Watson’s type of P. 
‘dissecta decurrens (which is a rather poor specimen) revealed my 
*See Coult. & Nels. New Man. Cent. Rocky Mts. 257. 
