SN om Sn a ney aN dR Te ee ee aN een Seana eee ee eee ee ee ee 
a a cD a ls a a 
1900] CURRENT LITERATURE 63 
that the petioles of the leaves are obsolete,’ and then he founds the species 
on Mr, Tweedy’s no. 432, in part, the other part being cited under D. cy/in- 
drocarpum, another new species which is also said to be nearly allied to D. 
conjugens. The familiar Arnica alpina Olin (or more properly A. fulgens 
Pursh) has come in for its share of segregation. Three or four species are 
recognized, but the writer is unable to discriminate between them, and some- 
how has the feeling that here we have had a splitting of hairs, Likewise 
Phyllodoce (Bryanthus) has had critical attention, four species being recog- 
nized, though it is suggested that two of them may be hybrids. Of these four 
species two were collected by the writer last summer (P. empetriformis and 
P. intermedia), both growing in the same little patch in an alpine gulch, and 
no difference was detected except that of color. Other genera might be 
mentioned, but one need not cite further examples. 
Somewhat in contrast with this is the occasional accrediting to Montana of 
species that are supposed to belong to quite a different geographical range. 
Erigeron Spectosus, Claytonia Virginica, and Phlox Douglasii may serve as 
examples. The following names occur in the first seventeen pages of the 
text, though no Specimens are cited: Dryopteris Filix-Mas, Pinus scopulorum, 
Abies amabilis, Juniperus occidentalis, Potamogeton natans, and P. Robbinsii. 
It is hardly necessary to state in this connection that the work does not seem 
to be even; some genera have received the most painstaking treatment, 
while others have been handled in a less critical manner. This, however, 
could scarcely be otherwise in a work of such magnitude. 
It may be interesting to note that there are discoid forms in Erigeron 
‘rifidus as well as in E. multifidus, and that if these are to be recognized as 
4 variety in one we must do so in the other. It would not be surprising to 
find that Z. compositus Pursh also has its discoid forms. 
Much obscurity in the past as to the limits and identity of species has 
been caused by inade 
of their brevity, 
In Carduus cano 
over as « 
the flower 
but rather because of the omission of essential characters. 
virens very characteristic pubescence of two kinds is passed 
more or less woolly.” In Artemisia tenuis we have no mention of 
ret el $ as to number, form, size, or kind, nor of the akenes, though to this 
vn 1S appended a variety, ‘‘ growing with the type,”’ to which less than 
‘wo lines is devoted. However, authors will of necessity differ as to what 
are essentials, 
are ashingtonia divaricata (Nutt.) Britt. and Phlox andicola (Nutt.) Britt. 
ee ct a practice in which the author is not in accord with 
wae Nuttall did not describe these species, and though he 
Dr. Brite mere Bames he should not be cited as if he were the author. 
ritton in the Lllustrated Flora very properly did not do so. 
