1907] SCH N EIDER—CONSPECTUS GENERIS AMORPHAE 305 
ARKANSAS.—Fulton, Bush, no. 2451. 
ALABAMA.—Monte Sano, Baker, 23. v. 97 (glaberrima, foliis iis A. glabrae 
simillimis, sed calycis dentes ut in A. fruticosa). 
FLORIDA (east).—Indian River, Palmer, no. 104 (et 1364) (foliolis ad 39!). 
Var. humilis, var. nov.—A. humilis Tausch, Flora 21:750. 1838; 
the following names are also probably synonyms: A. nonperjorata— 
Schkuhr, Bot. Handb. 2:333. 1808; A. nana Nutt. Fraser Ctal. 1813, 
fide Torr. et Gray, et A. nana Sims, Bot. Mag. tab. 2112. 1820, 
haud Nutt. 1818; A. jruticosa Hayne, Dendrol. Flora 134. 1822, 
nec Linn.—Frutex humilis, foliis plerisque paullo minoribus saepe 
angustioribus iis A. angustifoliae haud dissimilibus. 
As I said above, it is very difficult to decide whether a dried specimen belongs 
to typical A. fruticosa or to this variety or even to A. angustifolia, but the original 
specimens of TAUSCH are certainly not identical with A. angustifolia. The latter 
I never found living in our European gardens. Likewise the dwarf humilis 
everywhere appears ranean the limits of the type and perhaps only represents a 
mere “‘Standortsform 
Var. ebeoselanintl, var. nov.—A. crocealanata Watson, Dendrol. 
Britann. 2: tab. 139. 1825; an A. pumila Tausch, Dendroth. Bohem. 
exsicc., nec Michx. ?—Frutex elata omnibus partibus junioribus satis 
dense flavocanescentibus fere hirsutulis, foliolis etiam adultis superne 
Sparsius subtus densim pubescentibus. 
WarTSoN gives a very good description and drawing of his species, and the 
following forms agree very well with his characters: 
Missourt.—Ocean Springs, Miss Skeban (?) 8. v. 95. 
Lovtstana.—Alexandria, C. R. Ball, no. 422. 
ALABAMA.—Mobile, 16. iv (this specimen in the leaves somewhat resembles 
A. herbacea, but the calyx is quite that of A. jruticosa). 
LoripA.—Herb. Chapm., without other indication (this form has the leaf- 
lets in part somewhat more broadly elliptical); loco non indicato, H erb. Chapm. 
No. 1345. 
Unfortunately all these specimeris are in flower or with only very young 
It seems to me of great interest that such analagous forms appear in such 
very different localities. 
12. A. virGATA Small, Bull. Torr. Bot. Club 21:17. 1894.—A 
georgiana Small, Mss. in Herb. 
Grorcra.—DeKalb Co., Stone Mt., Small, 3 et 17. vii. 93; Biltm. Herb. 
NO. 14¢, 12. v. et 8. ix. 97; Eggert, 17. v. 99 (one of these forms with very large 
leaflets, 6.5 3.5°™, seems to me very near to A. mifens Boynt.) and 22. vii. 97; 
Cobb Co., Harper, no. 226. 
