^O.? revolute tit^s, lie-ht yellor;. A nctive of the Ore.nge free 3tete, 

 on Kor»Jes, necr Cloemf ontein, Tola Syans 7483, 



of them verv elegant plants when in flo^-er, should belong to the 

 spme genus or not. The leaves of --. recurahens, with the curious 

 tooth on the hack, are similar to those of i-. unidens, yet the 

 s-lsucous. and not rellucid dotted foliage and jrosy-flc ers of the 

 latter render it qtiite distinct. '^» 2. Bpovm 



(To be continued, ) 



Kesembryanthem'jjn, pnd some new e:enerp sentirsted froia it. 

 Gard. Chron. III. 70 : 311, 1921. 

 (Continued from page 303,) 



311 Most of the i^lants I am separating from the genus v/ere total- 

 ly un^:noY,Ti to Linne, so that they cannot be considered as having 

 been included in it by him. But the plants of the i'^. linguiforme 

 and M. di^^forrae type, v-hich I an also separating, were_ included 

 in the r-enus by Linne, f'lthoup;h -^rom his remark under '-■'•. lingui- 

 forme "this Is 10-styled," he evidently knev; that it differed from 

 the rest of the genus in that character, but appears not to have 

 ouoted that it also differed by the stigmas being very stout and 

 nlum.ose, and therefore not conforming to his cherecter of stigmas 

 ''subulate. " 



I now give the characters of some generic names proposed by 

 Hp'-orth th^t have been overlooked and the new genera I pronose to 

 establish, together with e list of the species that I consider 

 should be -nlaced under each. 



G-lottii^hyllum, H^v/. 

 This generic name vras proposed by Hov'orth in 1821 in his ■^■^evi- 

 sionps Plenterum Succulentarum^ r>. 103, under '"^, semicylindricum 

 at the bottom, of the page, vfheve he states that the section "Lin- 

 gui:°ormia constitues a good renus, (for v/hich) I propose the name 

 Glottiphyllura. " This name seems to have hitherto' escaped the no- 

 tice of all authors, but as I consider ^aworth to be correct in 

 reg'^rding these T^lRnts as forming a distinct genus, and one that 

 can be recognised at sight, I accept his generic name and character- 

 ise the genus as follows! — Very dwarf, succulent nlants branching 

 Glo'?e to the ground. Leaves 4 or more to each branch, long, narrow- 

 ly tonrue-shaped, half cylindric or subcylindric, soft and pulpy, 

 unifromly fveen, never gleucous-rreen. ^'lov/ers large, yellov;. 

 Gal;vx 4-lobed to the to^^ of the ovary. Petals in one or two series. 

 Style none; stigmas 8-10 radiating, stout and plumose; Capsule 8-10 

 celled; cells roofed by cell-v'inc's , and the opening at the outer 

 and o^ the wings more or leas closed bv a large tubercle, as shovra 

 in tvne D of ?ig. 62 on p. 151, 



This genus includes the sections Linc-uiformia and -Jifformia 

 of I'esembryanthemum, which only differ from one another by the 

 shp-no of their leaves, and in this character they grade into each 

 other, '^he nomenclature of the species belonging to it is in very 

 ?reat con^f^usion, Tincitially caused by modern mono.^raphers of the 

 fenus (Sonder and Berger) assumdnp- that the names applied by 

 Slem Dycv to his excellent figures are correct, v/hereas thej ere 

 often entirely vTonf:, for 3a Im ^yck seemjs rarely to have taken the 

 trouble to verify the names under which he cultivated the plants. 



