252 REVIEWS. 



more or less in longitudinal ridges, the whole "plane adnatus" 

 throno-liont. Now we should make more of these three types 

 than Dr. Planchon does. For the first goes with the caljp- 

 trately caducous corolla and polygamo-dioecious flowers of 

 true Vitis. The third with disk, if so called, wholly confluent 

 with the ovary itself, belongs to and includes all of the few 

 known sj)ecies (including Planchon's Landukia), which have 

 the striking biological character of climbing by the dilatation 

 and adhesion of the tendril tips ; and their flowers are 5-mer- 

 ous, essentially hermaphrodite, and with expanding corolla. 

 The second type of disk goes with 4-merous and some 5-merous 

 flowers with corolla expanding in anthesis, that is, to the genus 

 Cissus. We do not see the way to break this up into genera, 

 certainly not on the number of parts, for this varies in some 

 species, and while C. starts is 5-merous, the closely related 

 C. orientalis is 4-merous. However it may be with some 

 exotic groups, we must restore our two species, which formed 

 part of Michaux's Ampelopsis, to the genus Cissus. Under 

 that view the generic nomenclature is clear. The genus Am- 

 pelopsis (Michaux, p.p. and Torr. and Gray) is to be main- 

 tained on the lines long ago laid down in this country, and 

 now reinforced, for those species which are popularly well 

 known under this name. We do not feel obliged to defer to 

 any work of Eafinesque as late as the year 1830. Bat, as to 

 the present point, it seems to us that when Dr. Planchon fol- 

 lowed him in the appropriation of one part of Michaux's Am- 

 pelopsis, he should also have adopted Pafinesque's name for 

 the other part, namely, Quinaria, instead of making a new 

 name, Parthenocissus, the former name being free for use. 

 In our view both names are su23erfluous. As to true Vitis, 

 it remains to be seen whether it will be at all possible to dis- 

 tinguish twenty or more North American species. Perhaps 

 Engelmann allowed quite as many as can be defined. But 

 Planchon's long and conscientious labors upon the genus and 

 the family must be most helpful even where his conclusions 

 are not at once accepted.^ 



1 This is the last Review written by Professor Gray. — C. S. S. 



