264 TJniversity of California Publications in Botany [Vol. 9 



37. MALVACEAE (Mallow Family) 



1. SIDALCEA 



Flowers loosely disposed in elongated racemes; achenes reticulated but not 

 pubescent. 

 Stems creeping and rooting at the nodes; stems and petioles with long hispid 



hairs 1. S. reptans 



Stems erect. 



Plant glaucous and nearly smooth 2. S. glaucescens 



Plant greenish and scabrid with short stiff forked hairs 3. S. asprella 



Flowers small and densely spicate in usually short inflorescences; the lower 

 petioles with long spreading hairs; achenes pubescent, not reticulated 

 4. S. spicata 



1. Sidalcea reptans Greene, Pitt., vol. 3, p. 159. 1897. 



S. favosa Congdan, Erythea, vol. 7, p. 183. 1900. 



Type locality. — "In marshy ground, Panther Creek, Amador 

 County, California." 



Range. — Sierra Nevada. 



Zone. — Upper Transition and Canadian. 



Specimens examined. — Near Jackass meadows. Upper San Joaquin 

 River, Congdon, August 16, 1895 ; Shuteye Mountain, Madera County, 

 6,500 feet, J. Murdoch Jr. 2512. 



2. Sidalcea glaucescens Greene, Bull. Calif. Acad., vol. 1, p. 77. 



1885. 



Type locality. — "Summit Station, in the neighborhood of Donner 

 Lake." 



Range. — Mountains of California from Mt. Shasta to the southern 

 Sierra Nevada. See note below. 



Zone. — Transition and Canadian. 



Specimens examined.- — Summit, Heller 7047 ; same locality, E. L, 

 Greene, August, 1884; near Donner Lake, Torrey 54; Sierra County, 

 Lemmon in 1874 ; Summit, dry border of meadow, 7,100 feet. Smiley 

 452 ; Hermit Valley, Alpine County, Hooker and Gray in 1877 ; same 

 locality, 8,000 feet, Hall and Chandler 4772 ; near Dark Hole, Yosemite, 

 7,700 feet. Smiley 884; wet places on Middle Tule River, Tulare 

 County, 8-9,000 feet, Purpus 5184. 



The range of this species should be considerably extended according 

 to Gray (Proc. Am. Acad., vol. 22, p. 287) : "It abounds in the higher 

 Sierra Nevada, extends east to Utah, and northward apparently even 

 to British Columbia." This species is not included in Professor 

 Piper's Flora of Washington (Contr. Nat. Herb., vol. 11) though the 

 Synoptical Flora (vol. 1, pt. 1, p. 306) reaffirms Dr. Gray's statement 



