[Vol. 9 



308 ANNALS OF THE MISSOURI BOTANICAL GARDEN 



ally curved outwards. 



Distribution: western Colorado (fide Rydberg), southern Utah, 

 and Nevada, Arizona, southeastern California. 



Specimens examined : 



Utah: "southern Utah, northern Arizona, etc.," 1877. E. Pal- 

 mer 28 (Mo. Bot. Gard. Herb.) ; St. George, April 9, 1880, Jones 

 1648 (Mo. Bot. Gard. Herb.); waste grounds, St. Thomas, May 

 3, 1902, Goodding 700 (Rky. Mt. Herb, and Mo. Bot. Gard. 

 Herb.). 



Arizona: Williams Fork, March, 1S7G, E. Palmer 21 (Mo. Bot. 

 Gard. Herb.); Santa Rosa to Casa Grande, March 13-April 23, 

 1903, Griffiths 4029 (Mo. Bot. Gard. Herb.) ; Tucson Mountains, 

 March 13-April 23, 1903, Griffiths 3485 (Mo. Bot. Gard. Herb.) ; 

 near I ) u dleyville, March 13-April 23, 1903, Griffiths 3712 (Mo. 

 Bot. Gard. Herb.) ; Tucson, 1911, Beard (Mo. Bot. Gard. Herb.). 



Nevada: Lincoln County, 1880, Davis 52 (Mo. Bot. Gard. 

 Herb.) ; Moapa, April 8, 1905, Goodding 2191 (Rky. Mt. Herb. 

 and Mo. Bot. Gard. Herb.). 



California: near Mojave, April 24, 1905, Heller 7751 (Mo. Bot. 

 Gard. Herb.) ; plains east of Kern, April (i, 1905, Heller 7605 (Mo. 

 Bot. Gard. Herb.); Adelanto, Mojave Desert, April 30, 1918, 

 Parish 11797 (Mo. Bot. Gard. Herb.) ; Coyote Canyon in western 

 borders of the Colorado Desert, April, 1902, Hall 2786 (Univ. 

 Calif. Herb.). 



The present subspecific treatment of C. lasiophyllus is not to 

 be regarded as particularly discriminative and is intended only 

 to indicate the broad groups within specific limits which are 

 somewhat localized geographically. It is not supposed that these 

 "varieties" are homogeneous within themselves. They could 

 doubtless be broken up into a number of "forms" or "races." It 

 is doubtful, however, if much could be done in the way of further 

 segregation in the herbarium alone and perhaps the study is one 

 for the geneticist rather than for the taxonomist. 



To emphasize the localized racial diversity of this species the 

 following quotation is made from Dr. Greene's 'Flora Francis- 

 cana': "The common form at San Francisco is small, early flower- 

 ing, and has suberect pods. In the coast range the plant is often 

 a yard high or more, late flowering, with pods straight and 

 strongly deflexed. On the plains east of the Mount Diablo Range 

 grows in great abundance a plant here referred which differs in 

 being glabrous, with pods more or less curved, often spreading 

 only, sometimes deflexed. All these need further examination; 



