4 Mr. J. Ball on the genus Leontodon. 



The structure of the pappus has hitherto been considered to 

 afford the surest and most constant characters throughout the 

 entire of the Cichorace(S. I am led to doubt the value of the 

 characters by which Koch has divided his sections Apargia and 

 Asterothrix, as I do not think that the differences pointed out 

 by him in the structure of the pappus correspond to natural 

 affinities or diversities in the general characteristics of those 

 groups, or that the natural groups which he has proposed con- 

 stantly exhibit the characters assigned by him. 



I shall have to describe a remarkable form of this genus, very 

 nearly allied to L. hastilis, in which all the rays of the pappus 

 are either nearly devoid of their usual feathery plumes, or else 

 lose that appendage at a very early period ; — thus requiring a 

 modification of KocVs character of the genus, where he says, 

 " Plumulse radiorum non deciduse." 



In distinguishing the sections of the genus, T have not followed 

 Koch in giving the name Apargia to the small group of which 

 L. incanus is the type ; it seems to me more proper to retain 

 that name for the larger group which he has named Dens Leonis, 

 while his section Apargia should in my opinion be united to 

 Asterothrix. If it be determined that the sections of the genus 

 should be founded exclusively upon characters taken from the 

 pappus, it will be necessary to subdivide Koch's section Astero- 

 thrix into two. I have thought it better merely to indicate the 

 three groups which would thus be formed from the section to 

 which I have given that name. 



In accordance with views which I have at various times 

 attempted to circulate amongst botanists, I shall in the following 

 essay distinguish the subspecies, varieties, and less permanent 

 forms of the species here described by fixed symbols, instead of 

 adhering to the ordinary plan of affixing to such forms a Greek 

 or Roman letter whose meaning is not established by any pre- 

 vious convention. 



I have elsewhere* endeavoured to show that the introduction 

 of a systematic notation for this purpose may conduce to objects 

 much more important than the convenience and clearness which 

 it would tend to impart to the details of descriptive botany. The 

 naturalist is, as I believe, gi'eatly dependent for those conceptions 

 which are to enlarge and elevate the scientific character of his 

 pursuit, upon such improvements in technical arrangement and 

 notation as may assist in compelling order amongst the multi- 

 tudinous forms of life which are exhibited to his observation. 



Only by slow degrees, and by minute and comprehensive study 



* Atti della sesta Riunione degli Scienzati Italiani, p. 505. — Report of 

 he British Association for 1845 : Proceedings of the Sections. 



