I -l, DAVENPORT ACADEMY <>F NATURAL SCIENCES. 



Habitat: — Scott's Valley, near Santa Cruz, Dr. C. L. Anderson, 

 1887. Ben Lomond, Santa Cruz Mountains, July, 1888, growing in 

 deep, sandy soil. Differs from C. pungens in its slender- branching 

 habit, its usually naked upper joints, and smaller inflorescence. This 

 very distinct species probably includes C. pungens, var. nivea, Curran. 

 briefly noted in Bull. Cal. Acad. Sci., IV., pp. 3-4. 



13 2 . C. robusta — C. Douglasii, Parry, 1. c, not Benth. — Charac- 

 ter transferred, ex-Habitat : 



"Stout, 2-18 inches high, light green, densely pubescent, simple or 

 irregularly-branched above, with one or more foliaceous whorls on the 

 main stem and lower axils; radical leaves, ob-lanceolate, tapering to a 

 narrow petiole; upper involucral bracts acicular, densely ciliate; invol- 

 ucres oblong -triangular, 2-3 lines long, segments unequal, slightly 

 divergent with scarious margins, and short, recurved uncinate teeth; 

 perianth short pedicellate, exsert, lobes nearly equal, shortly mucronate, 

 and erosely denticulate; stamens nine, adnate to the lower tube, an- 

 thers oval; style akene and embryo as in allied species." 



Habitat: — -Dry, sandy soil, margins of Monterey Bay, north of 

 Aptos, Parry, 1S83. Sandy banks and streets of Alameda, adjoining 

 the bay, E. L. Green, 1887. Distributed in Chorizanthe sets by C. C. 

 Parry, as No. 13, C. Douglasii, Benth. 



It was not till an opportunity offered of seeing typical C. Douglasii 

 in the Gray Herbarium at Cambridge, and the original Douglasian 

 specimens at the herbarium of the Royal Gardens, Kew, England, that 

 I was made aware of my mistake in referring this very distinct species 

 to C. Douglasii. Since then I have seen and collected abundantly the 

 genuine plant, in the mountain valleys back of Santa Cruz, undoubtedly 

 the original locality. Owing to the close resemblance in habit and 

 general aspect which the above described species has to C. valida, 

 Watson, I was inclined to regard it as a marked variety of the latter, 

 but the floral characters are so distinct that I am obliged to regard the 

 former as an undescribed and well-defined species, to follow C. Doug- 

 lasii as No. 13 2 in the synoptical list. 



