NOTES ON NEW AND OLD GENERA 17I 



Moreover, the group of plants to which the name Gonopyrum, 

 F. and M. was given is not simply a synonym to the Polygonella 

 Michx.^ but a real segregate of distinct plants. The genus differs 

 from Polygonella by notable characters such as perfect flowers and 

 lateral embryo, shape of calyx, whereas those of the latter are 

 polygamo-dioicous and have an axillary embryo. The flowers 

 are very different in the two groups. The Gonopyros Raf. is a 

 proposed segregated genus of Diospyros Linn. To replace the 

 invalidated Gonopyrum F. and M. we suggest the name 

 Psammogonum. 



Psammogonum Nwd. nom. nov. 



Gonopyrum F. and M. 1840 not Gonopyros Raf. 1828. 



Psammogonum americanum (F. and M.) Nwd. 



Gonopyrum americanum. F. and M. 1. c. 



Polygonella ericoides Engelm. and Gray. Bost. Jr. Nat. Hist. 

 V, p. 230, (1845). 



Polygonella americana Small, Mem. Torr. Bot. CI. V. p. 

 141, (1894). 



Psammogonum articulatum (Linn.) Nwd. 

 Gonopymim articulatum (Linn.) F. and M. 1. c. 

 Polygonella articulata (Linn.) Meisn. Gen. 2, p. 228, (1836-42). 

 Polygonum articulatum Linn., vSp. PI. p. 363, (1753). 



Delphinium. 



The type of the genus Delphinium, whether we refer the genus 

 to Linnaeus, as many now do, or more correctly to the ancients, 

 is not Delphinium, Consolida Linn, as Dr. Britton would intimate 

 but rather Delphinium peregrinum Linn. This plant and its nearest 

 allies of the same group D. Consolida, D.Ajacis^ Linn, differ from 

 the other members of the aggregation now commonly called 

 by the name Delphinium, so markedly that we can scarcely restrain 

 our wonder that systematists should call this a genus. D. Consolida 

 and its allies have but one follicle in fruit, the others have three; 

 it has, moreover, the petals united into two sets and with its 

 ally, is an annual; our native plants have separate petals and are 

 perennials, whereas the petals of D. Consolida and D. Ajacis are 

 ver}' conspicuously united. One might as reasonably have in- 

 cluded species of Aconittim- in this miscellaneous modern Del- 



I Gray, vS. F. Nat. An. Br. PI. II., p. 711, (1821). 



