500 CockERELL: Norra AMERICAN SPECIES OF HyMENOXYS 
HyMENoxys oporATA DC. 
DeCandolle described this in 1836 as Hymenoxys odorata. It 
was said to be part of Cephalophora anthemoides, Less., in Linnaea, 
6: 518. 1831. In 1898 Dr. Britton tranferred it to Picradenta. 
Prof. A. Nelson has very kindly copied for me the short latin de- 
scription of DeCandolle. This tells us that the plant was collected 
by Berlandier, but the record of the precise locality was lost; it 
was however in ‘‘ Mexico,”’ which of course means the Mexico of 
1836. The descriptive part reads as follows. 
“ FT, odorata, invol. squamis lanceolatis acuminatis. Folia 
multo tenuius pinnatipartita quam prioris. Pedunculi foliis duplo 
triplove longiores. Ligule 5-6 flavae apice grosse tridentatae. 
Pappi squamellae lanceolatae acuminatae. Capitulum tritum valde 
odorum.” 
This has been understood to be the plant which Buckley named 
.Phileozera multifiora. Dr. Greene, however, took up Buckley's 
name, declaring that the plant of DeCandolle could not be 
recognized. I cannot agree with Dr. Greene that the Texan plant 
is ‘much at variance’’ with that of DeCandolle ; on the contrary, — 
I think the description applies very well.* Unfortunately, how- 
ever, it applies exactly as well to P. chrysanthemoides, and there- 
fore I think it had better be dropped, unless the type specimen can 
be examined and the identity of the plant proved. Even in the 
latter case, it might be questioned whether a name is valid, when 
it is defined by a description which does not serve for its identifi- 
cation. 
If we accept the view that chrysanthemoides and multiflora are 
merely extremes of one species, still odorata is not the name of that 
species, but chrysanthemoides, which dates from 1820. 
HyYMENOXYS CHRYSANTHEMOIDES (H. B. K.) DC. Prodr. 5: 661. 
1836. 
Actinea chrysanthemoides H. B. K. Nov. Gen. et Sp. 4: 298: 
fl. £91 Tao. 
Actinella chrysanthemoides Gray, Proc. Am. Acad. 19: 3? 
1883. 
Sol ie a 
* As regards the odor, however, Dr. Greene writes: ‘*I am_ positive that all 
through southern New Mexico the plant called ‘ odorafa’ has but a feeble odor, and 
that not grateful. I walked over it, and gathered it often enough”’ (/étt., April, 1904)- 
