Ranunculus.] . flora indica. 37 



longo glabro. — Royle! III. 53. R. distans, Royle! ib. R. brevirostris, 

 Edgew. in Linn. Tr. xx. 28? R. riparius, Edgew. ib.? 



Hab. In Himalaya temperata vulgaris, alt. 3-10,000 ped.! in Sikkim 

 in jugis interioribus ! — (Fl. per totam sestatem.) (v. v.) 



Rkizoma horizontale, vel radix descendens fusiformis. Caulis erectus, ramosus, 

 1-2-pedalis, multiflorus, adpresse albo-pilosus, pilis rarius prope basin caulis subpaten- 

 tibus. Folia radicalia tripartita, supra sparse pilosa, infra adpresse sericea, diam. 

 2-4-pollicaria ; segmenta late ovalia, basi cuneata, rarius in petiolum angustata, in 

 lobos plures argute dentatos grosse incisa; caulina sessilia, tripartita, segmentis ob- 

 longis grosse incisis. Panicula divaricato-ramosa, multiflora. Flores diam. polli- 

 cares. Sepala ovalia, extus villosa. Petala fere orbicularia, basi cuneata, sepalis 

 duplo longiora. Achenia ovalia, in capitulum diam. 3 lin. collecta, lsevia, marginata, 

 in stylum brevem acutum basi latum compressum sensim attenuata. 



This species has the habit and general appearance of R. acris, nemorosus, lanugi- 

 nosus, etc., but we have not been able to identify it with any of them, though we 

 must confess that the characters by which it is distinguished from all of these are of 

 the smallest possible importance, as being derived from the achenia, which vary to a 

 very great degree. Many specimens of these European species can be selected from 

 among the great numbers now before us, which, without fruit, are undistinguishable 

 from the Indian plant ; and there is a specimen in the Hookerian Herbarium from 

 Fries, marked R. sylvaticus, which, with widely different foliage, has exactly the 

 same beak as the ordinary state of the Indian plant. There is no doubt that the 

 leaves vary extremely in all these species ; and if the characters derived from the 

 achenia be found insufficient, which we believe will be the case, we fear that many of 

 the supposed species now distinguished by authors, and the present among the num- 

 ber, must be reduced to R acris, L. We have only seen very imperfect specimens 

 of Mr. Edgeworth's plants, but we believe them to be rather abnormal states than 

 distinct species. The alpine one closely resembles some of our own specimens, and 

 E. riparius seems only a mountain plant, casually carried down to the plains. 



19. R. bulbosus (L. Sp. 778); caule erecto, basi bulboso ad- 

 presse piloso, foliis ternatim pinnatisectis, panicula multiflora, sepalis 

 reflexis, acheniis in capitulum globosum collectis impunctatis, recepta- 

 culo oblongo glabro.— -DC. Prod. i. 41 ; Royle! III. 53 ; Ledeb. Fl. Ross. 



i. 44. 



Hab. In Himalaya occ. temp. : Kanawer, Royle! — (*. s.) 

 Distrib. Europa tota et Asia occiden talis ! in Americam tempera- 

 tain, ex Torrey et Gray, ex Europa introducta. 



Caulis pedalis, ramosus. Folia trisecta, segmentis profunde trifidis grosse incisis ; 

 caulina tripartita, segmentis linearibus pinnatifido-lobatis. Flores J-1-polli cares. 

 Sepala ovata, pilosa. Petala late obovata. Achenia in capitulum diam. 3-lineare 

 congesta, ovalia, marginata, in stylum brevem late triangularem acutum sensim atte- 

 nuata. 



\Yc do not feel at all certain that this plant has not been introduced through some 

 mistake among Dr. Royle's Indian plants. It is certainly not common in the Hima- 

 laya, as it has not been found by any of the recent travellers in these mountains. 



20. R. fibrosus (Wall. Cat. 4706!); caule erecto patentim his- 

 pido, foliis ternatim pinnatisectis, segmentis ad basin usque partitis, 

 panicula multiflora, sepalis reflexis, acheniis in capitulum magnum glo- 

 bosum collectis marginatis punctatis, receptaculo subgloboso sericeo- 

 piloso. 



