1904] BRIEFER ARTICLES ' 299 
noticed the name in the second edition of Fasricrus Enum. Pl. Hort. 
Helm, (1763), where it is based upon ‘‘Gramen ischaemon Plinii, Clus. 
H. CCXVII,” and “Panicum spicis aggregatis, basi interiore nodosi, flos- 
culis, geminis muticis vaginis foliorum punctatis, L. Sp. 8?” Both these 
citations refer to Panicum sanguinale L. This work is at the Missouri 
Botanical Garden. Kuntze states that although dated 1763 this work 
appeared after that of ADANSON. It would appear that the latter author may 
have adopted the word from Faxrictus nevertheless. If the name appeared 
in the first edition of Fasricrus and with the same type, then there would be 
no doubt about its antedating ApANson. I have not been able to find 
this work in America, but it is in London, and Mr. Epmunp Baker has 
kindly sent me a transcript of what appears concerning Digitaria. It says 
“Digitaria Heist. Dactylis Raj. Gramen dactylon majus panicula longa, 
spicis pluribus nudis crassis. Sloane.” (Fasricius Enum. Pl. Hort. 
Helm, 207. 1759). The same citation from SLOANE appears under Pani- 
cum dissectum L. OP. §7.° 1753. Consequently Digitaria is published 
according to the canon of the code above mentioned. 
But Paspalum L. was established in the same year (Syst. ed. 10. 855, 
1759) and is typified by Panicum dissectum L., as this is the first species 
mentioned, although LINNAEUS changes the name to Paspalum dimidiatum. 
ere is a curious mix-up here. In the first edition of the Species Plan- 
forum Linnagus describes as no. 6 Panicum dissectum, which is Pas- 
palum dissectum L., Sp. ed. 2, to which he erroneously refers Sloane’s 
Fe » hig. 2, and no. 7, Panicum dimidiatum, which is Stenotaphrum 
“ohana In the tenth edition of the Systema he publishes Paspalum, 
retnag the first species P. dimidiatum, although he bases it upon his 
PAP peg no. 6. SLOANE’s plant above mentioned he names P. 
dieu . the second edition of the Species Plantarum he corrects the 
ly and publishes Paspalum dissectum based upon Panicum dissectum 
ion, 
of the first edit 
There are still two questions to’ be answered. Which was published 
first , 
“a Fapricrus or LINNAEUS’ Systema? Was Digitaria published in some 
“ work of HEIsTER’s ? 
t 
Sop may be remarked that HALLER uses Digitaria in the same sense as 
POLI and 
c a few years earlier, basing it upon Panicum sanguinale and 
oe (Hall. Stirp. Helv. 2:244. 1768). 
atise from ra nes mentioned emphasize the evil consequences which may 
AS, Hircy, nging well known names without sufficient investigation.— 
Ock, U.S. Dept. Agriculture, Washington, D. C. 
