NORTH .LMERICA 



101 



Engler, Adolf, and others. Le nouveau code botanique de 

 Berlin. [Le Mans. 1901.] 



Farlow, W. G. A consideration of the Species plantarum of 

 Linnaeus as a basis for the starting p )int of the nomenclature 

 of cryptogams, n. p. [1910.] 



and Atkinson, G. F. The botanical congress at 



Brus.sels. (New York. 1910.) 



F6e, A. L. A. Essai historique et critique sur la phytonymie 

 ou nomenclature veg(5tale. 



Recaeil des travaux de la Soc. d'amateurs des sci., dc, fagric, et des arts a 

 LilU. 1826-27, pp. 161-184. 



Fernald, M. L. The instability of the Rochester nomencla- 

 ture. [Chicago. 1901.] 



Some recent publications and the nomenclatorial 



principles they represent. [Chicago. 1901.) 



Forsyth, William, jr. A botanical nomenclator. London. 

 1794. 



Fournier, Eugene. Reforme de la nomenclature botanique, 

 par le Dr. Saint-Lager. [Paris. 1880.) 



Gray, Asa. Gender of names of varieties. [New Haven. 

 1SS4.1 



Greene, E. L. Bibliographical difficulties in botany. Wash- 

 ington. 1898. 



Hallier, Hans. New propositions to botanical nomenclature. 

 Hamburg. 1905. 



Das proliferierende personliche unci das sachliche, 



konservative prioritatsprinzip in der botanischen nomen- 

 klatur. Hamburg. 1900. 



Harms, Hermann. Die nomenclaturbewegung der letzten 

 jahre. Leipzig. 1897. 



Harvard university, Cambridge, Mass. Amendments to the 

 Paris code of botanical nomenclature, suggested for the con- 

 sideration of the Vienna congress of 1905. Cambridge. 1904. 



Heer, Oswald. Ueber das citiren der autoren. [Stuttgart. 

 1874.] 



Janchen, Erwin. Zur frage der totgeboi-enen namen in der 

 botanischen nomenklatur. Wien. 1909. 



Proposition d'une amplification de la liste de noms 



g^n^riques de phan(5rogames, qui doivent etre conserves en 

 tous cas. [Wien. 1910.] 



Knowlton, F. H. The nomenclature question. [Madison, 

 Wis. 1896.] 



Kuntze, Otto. Additions aux lois de nomenclature bota- 

 nique. [Paris. 1900.] 



— ■ — ■ — • Les besoinis de la nomenclature botanique. [Le 

 Mans. 1895.] 



— — — Die bewegung in der botanischen nomenclatur von 

 ende 1891 bis mai 1893. [Cassel. 1893.] 



Expose sur les congres pour la nomenclature bo- 



tanique et six propositions pour le congres de Paris en 1900. 

 [Geneve. 1900.] 



Liste seit 1891, bereits anerkannter legal renovirter 



und " nicht verjiihrter " phanerogamer gattungsnamen. 

 [Leipzig, etc. 1898.] 



Ueber neue nomenclatorische aeusserungen. Cassel. 



1899. 



Nomenclatur-studien. Geneve. 1894. 



La nomenclature rSformee des alga; et fungi d'apres 



le code parisien de 1867, et contre les fantaisies de M. Le 

 Jolis. [Paris. 1899.] 



Nomenklaturanfang und reform internationaler 



kongresse. [Arnstadt. 1900.] 



Nomenclaturae botanicae codex brevis maturus. 



Stuttgart. 1903. 



Die vorteile von 1737 als nomenklatur-anfang. [Ber- 



hn. 1899.] 



Lenunon, J. G. A needed reform. " Good English names 

 for our west-American trees." 



Cutting from Pacijic coast wood and iron, Aug. 1896. 



Linne, Carl von (1707-1778). Critica botanica in qua 

 nornina plantarum generica, specifica, & variantia examini 

 subjiciuntur, selectiora confirmantur, indigna rejiciuntur, 

 simulque doctrina circa denominationem plantarum traditur; 

 seu, Fundamentorum botanicorum pars iv. Lugduni Ba- 

 tavorum. 1737. 



Mathieu, Charles. Nomenclator pomologicus. Berlin. 1889. 



"Henutzte litteratur," pp. [3-4]. 



Mueller, Ferdinand, baron von. BriefTemarks on nomen- 

 clature in biomorphic science. [Melbourne. 1884.] 

 Nieuwland, J. A. Some Linna;an trivial names. 



American midland naturalist, 1911, ii. 97-122. 



Pound, Roscoe. Dr. Kuntze's " Nomenclatur-studien." 

 [Boston, etc, 1894.] 



Messrs. Rand and Redfield on nomenclature. [Bos- 

 ton, etc, 1894.] 



Ra&nesque, C. S. Principes fondamentaux de somiologie. 

 Palerme. 1814. 



Robinson, B. L. On the " List of Pteridophyta aijd Sperma- 

 tophyta of northeastern America. [Chicago. 1895.] 



The publication of new binomials in works of com- 

 posite authorship. [Berkeley, Cal. 1897.) 



Some reasons why the Rochester nomenclature 



cannot be regarded as a consistent or stable system. [Chi- 

 cago. 1898.) 



Saint-Lager, Jean. Le proces de la nomenclature bota- 

 nique et zoologique. Paris. 1886. 



Quel est I'inventeur de la nomenclature binaire. 



Paris. 1883. 

 ■ R6forme de la nomenclature botanique. Reviewed 



in [Fournier, Eugene]. 

 Remarques historiques sur les mots plantes males et 



plantes femelles. 



Annates de la Societe botanique de Lyon, 1884, xi, 1-48. 



— - The same, Paris. 1884. 



Smith, E. F. The botanical club check ILst. [Washington. 



1895.] 

 Spegazzini, Cdrlos. Notes synonymiques. [Buenos Aires. 



1903.] 

 Thompson, W. P., and Bailey, I. W. Are Tetracentron, 



Trochodendron and Drimys specialized or primitive types? 



[New York. 1916.] 

 Warburg, Otto. Einfuhrung einer gleichmassigen nomen- 

 klatur in der pflanzengeographie. Berlin. 1900. 

 Ward, L. F. The nomenclature question. [New York. 



1895.] 

 Watson, Sereno. On nomenclature. [Bloomington, Ind. 



1892.] 



2 BY COUNTRIES 



Including local floras. 



a NORTH AMERICA 



American association for the advancement of science. 



List of Pteridophyta and Spermatophyta growing without 

 cultivation in northeastern North America. New York. 

 1893-94. 

 Audubon, J. J. The birds of America from drawings made 

 in the United States and their territories. New York, etc. 

 1840-44, 



The plates coutain figures of m iny trees. 



Baldwin, William. Reliquia; Baldwinianje. Philadelphia. 

 1843. 



Barton, W. P. C. A flora of North America. 3 vol. Phila- 

 delphia. 1821-23. 



Bentham, George. The botany of the voyage of H. M. S. 

 Sulphur, under the command of Sir Edward Belcher, during 

 the years 1836-1842. London. 1844. 



