THE GENUS NOTOTRICHE. 233 
4300-4600 m., Whymper (Herb. Mus. Brit.); Antisana, 4600-4900 m., Whymper 
(Herb. Mus. Brit.); without precise locality, 4300 m., Pearce (Herb. Kew.). 
NoTOTRICHE PHYLLANTHOS forma.—Folia petiolis circa 1:7 cm. longis, stipulis petiolis 
mediis adnatis partibus liberis 4 mm. longis late subulatis uti petiolis facie et in dorso 
et ad margines dense stellato-tomentosis, laminis profunde trifidis 8-10 mm. longis, 
10-12 mm. latis, segmentis trifidis lobis obovatis marginibus inflexis supra densissime 
stellato-velutino-tomentosis infra coriaceis stellato-tomentosis. Calyx circa 9 mm. 
longus. Corolla 1:6-177 cm. longa. Carpella 7:5 mm. longa, birostrata, stellato- 
tomentosa, rostris 2:5 mm. longis. 
ConoMBIA: (? Ecuapor) without precise locality, Hartweg, 917 (Herb. Lindley in 
Herb. Univ. Cantab.). 
The Nototriches of Ecuador (N. pichinchensis, N. phyllanthos, N. Jamesonii, and 
N. Hartwegii) offer considerable difficulties to the systematist, and although all the 
literature has been studied and the material from Paris, Berlin, Kew, the British Museum, 
and Cambridge has been examined, there are still certain outstanding questions. 
Cavanilles* in the first instance described two species of Side from the kingdom of 
Quito—S. pinnata, S. acaulis, and also S. phyllanthos t from Peru. He was then 
followed by Humboldt t, who described two additional species— S. pichinchensis and 
S. saxifraga. Subsequently $ this last species was merged with the S. phyllanthos of 
Cavanilles, although Cavanilles's plant is said to come from Peru, whilst the locality 
of S. saxifraga is Antisana in Ecuador. As Cavanilles's type has not been seen, 
and as it has proved impossible to obtain information from Madrid, it is not 
possible to settle this point conclusively, but the two descriptions certainly suggest 
that these two specimens belong to one and the same species. To add to the confusion, 
Hartweg brought back two species bearing the numbers 917 and 918: the former was 
referred to Sida pichinchensis, H. & B., whilst no. 918 was referred to Sida phyllanthos ; 
and in this determination Bentham || was followed by Weddell], who quotes these two 
numbers in the ‘Chloris Andina. The Sida pinnata and S. acaulis of Cavanilles have been 
identified by Asa Gray ** with two specimens brought by Pickering from the Cordillera 
above Lima, and are redescribed by him under the names Malvastrum pinnatum and 
M. Cavanillesii respectively ; but in view of the fact that Cavanilles's plants came from 
Quito it seems highly probable that these determinations are not correct. 
From a eareful study of the material available under the specific names of phyllanthos 
and pichinchensis, it is evident that we have here a very closely-related series of forms in 
which certain well-marked types can be distinguished, but which tend to be united 
together by forms more or less intermediate in character. When this region is better 
* Cav. Icon. v. p. 13, t. 422. figs. 1, 2. || Benth. Pl. Hartwegiane, p. 164. 
T Cav. Diss. v. pp. 276, 277, t. 127. fig. 4. « Weddell, Chlor. And. ii, p. 278. 
+ Humb. Pl. ZEquin. pp. 115-117, t. 116. ** Gray, in Bot. U.S. Expl. Exp. pp. 154, 156. 
$ Humb., Bonpl., & Kunth, Nov. Gen. et Spec. v. p. 264. 
SECOND SERIES.—BOTANY, VOL. VII. 2N 
