natural Family of Plants called Compoaitce. 1 1 1 



fosus vimineus, foliis oblongo-ovatisoppositis,floribus comosis" of 

 Browne* ; while Linnoiis has quoted and even derived his spe- 

 cific name from the same author's "Amelliis ramosus, foliis remotis 

 terminalibuSjfulcrislongis divaricatis-|;" which, instead of belong- 

 ing to D'ulens scandetis, I believe, for the following reasons, to be 

 Bidens nivca. 1st, The figure in Burmann's 'i'hesaurus Zejlani- 

 cuslil, quoted by Browne for his plant, though belonging to Lavenia 

 €7'ecta, is at the same time a good representation of Bidens nivea, 

 and very unhke Bidens scandens. 2dly, Browne's description in 

 most respects very well agrees with the former species, but cer- 

 tainly not with Bidens scandens. And 3dly, I infer that Bidens 

 nivea was actually in Browne's Herbarium, from finding it in 

 the Flora Jamaicensis published in the 5th volume of Amoenitates 

 Academicfe, and formed chiefly from that Herbarium ; though a 

 very erroneous reference for this species is there made to Browne's 

 first Santolina, which, from the description, cannot possibly be- 

 long to Bidens nivea, but is probably Verbesina gigantea. 



M. Decandolle has lately established a new genus, Salmea, con- 

 sisting of Bidens scandens, Bidens hirsuta, and a third species 

 which J have not examined. These plants are very properly se- 

 parated from Bidens by this excellent botanist, and well distin- 

 guished both from that genus and from Melananthera. It is 

 rather remarkable, however, that he has not thought it necessary 

 to compare Salmea with Spila7it/ius, from which, according to his 

 description, it differs only in its imbricate involucrum. But 

 as in Spilanthus the foUola of the involucrum are not exactly 

 equal, and are disposed at least in a double series, I have in- 



* Browne, Jam. 317. f I. c. 



I Eupatoriophalacruni scrophulariae aquatics foliis oppositis. Burnt. Thesaur. Zieyl, 

 p. 95. t. 42. 



troduced 



