256 C. Dewey on Caricography. 
his Sum. Veg. Scand., p. 224, with a direct reference to the same 
figure, 104 Schk., and fully distinguished from C. loliacea, L. 
The spikelets of C. tenella have stamens at their summit, while 
the other has them at the base. By Dr. Lang in the Linnea, vol. 
viii, p. 518, C. tenella is described under the name of C. Blyttit, 
Nyland, and the same fig. 104, Schk., quoted. Lang remarks 
that this species “was formerly, and still is confounded with 
C. loliacea, L.,”” but is i incosnn: “ toto ceelo” by the position 
of the stamens ’ fron C. loliacea. 
Hence it is evident, that C. gracilis, Ehrh., is not C. tenella, 
Schk., Part First, p. 23. 
The only remaining difficulty in the synonymy is whether C. 
disperma, Dew. is the same as C. tenella, Schk. The separation 
of C. gracilis, Ehrh. from C. tenella, Schk., does not of course 
decide the suber case either way. Mr. Tuckerman in his Enum., 
p. 19, says, “‘Haud tamen licet, etiam si certum plantam nos- 
tram Sehkubeik €. tenellam esse, nomen Deweyi mutare, quia 
auctor ipse C. tenelle nomen suum aboluit.” But the name, ©. 
tenella, is perpetuated by later writers. Let, then, C. disperma, 
ew., be absorbed in C. tenella, Schk., when their identity is es- 
tablished. This may be accomplished or not ere long by com- 
parison of specimens at home and abroad. In the mean time the 
following J deserve Nie In Sum. Veg. Scand., Fries 
ferent from C. tenella. Yet C. dis sperma differs from C. loliacea 
“toto ceelo”’ by the position of the stamens, and when the sta- 
mens are visible can not be mistaken for C. loliacea, L. Neither 
can their fruit be confounded. 
ries also gives the following characters of C. tenella, Viz. 
“fructibus ovalibus obtusis erostratis obsolete nervosis, squama 
ovato-lanceolata acuta triplo longioribus,” several of which are 
not pad in C, disperma. 
m these considerations, the following synonymy are my 
ies 
1. C. aes. 1. et Wahl., Schk., Pars 2, p. 18, excl. synonymus: 
C. gracilis, Ehrh., non C. tenella, Schk. 
C. loliacea, Fries et Lang. 
2. C. tenella, Schk. Pars 1, p. 23, fig. 104, non Pars 2, p- 18- 
pe Nov. — ili, et Sum. Veg. Scand. 
in Linnea. 
_ 6. Blyth, Npland 
feisty te oa Eee re 
<j htgio * ~~ 
