128 THE AMERICAN MIDLAND NATURALIST. 
plain his statement that Conradia includes all of the Ameri- 
can species of Tofieldia. No definite type species is indicated, 
and the statement regarding the stamens having ‘‘base broad”’ 
applies better to Tofieldia glabra Nutt., than to the species of 
Triantha (Nutt.) Baker, and hence the name Conradia, doubt- 
less meant by its author to cover this group, must be dis- 
carded, or at best considered as a synonym of Tofieldia. 
POLYGONELLA SEROTINA (Raf.) House, comb. nov. 
Polygonum serotinum Raf. Ann. Nat. 12. 1920. ; 
Gonopyrum americanum F..& M. Mem. Acad. St, Petersb. (VI) (4): 
144, 1840. 
Polygonella ericoides Engelm. & Gray, Bost. Jour. Nat. Hist. (5): 280. 
1845. 
Polygenella meissneriana Shuttl. ex Meissn. in DC. Prades (CLA) ie Sik 
1856. 
Polygonella americanum Small, Torr. Club Mem. (5): 141. 1894. 
The description of this species by Rafinesque is clear and 
sufficiently accurate to quite positively identify it with P. 
americanum (F. & M.) Small. The type locality is given as 
near Lexington, Kentucky. Rafinesque states that the species 
will probably belong to the genus Polygonella of Michaux, 
which he has called Lyonella. (In this connection it is to be 
noted that Lyonia Raf. Med. Repos. II. (5): 353. 1808, is a 
mere renaming of Polygonella Michaux, and hence rests upon 
the same type species. Lyonella Raf. Am. Mo. Mag. (2): 266. 
1818, is also a renaming of Michaux’s genus Polygonella. 
In the second edition of the Flora of the Southeastern 
United States, Small places P. articulata and P. americana, 
in the genus Gonopyrum Fisch. & Mey. 1840; and if this 
segregation of Polygonella be maintained, the plant under 
consideration will be called GONOPYRUM SEROTINUM (Raf.) 
House, comb. nov. 
VITIS LECONTIANA, House, nom. nov. 
Vitis bicolor LeConte, Proc. Acad. Phila. (1852-53): 272. 1854. Not 
V. bicolor Raf. Med. Fl. (2): 140. 1820. 
From the manner in which “Vitis bicolor’ is cited in the 
Index Kewensis, the authors of that index must have assumed 
that Rafinesque’s species was the same in character as well as 
in name, as that well known species first described by Le- 
Conte. An examination of Rafinesque’s description, however, 
