46 Caricography. 
prema subsessili, infima longé pedunculata, pedunculo anci- 
piti, fructibus ovalibus vel obovatis subtriquetris nervosis 
apice recurvis et integris glabris, squama ovata scabro-mu- 
cronata vix ongioribus 
Culm 8—12 ioches high, triquetrous, scabrous above, 
leafy; leaves lincar-lanceolate, rough on the edge, long as 
the culm, shorter below, with striate sheaths white opposite 
to the leaf; bracts linear-laneeolate, leafy, longer than the 
culm, with short sheaths ; staminate spike single, erect, pe- 
dunculate. short, triquetrous, from the same sheath with the 
high«st pistillate; staminate scale oblong, rather obtuse, 
sometimes submueronate, yellowish; pistillate spikes two to 
four, oblong, cylindric, alternate, rather loose-flowered, high- 
est nearly sessile, sometimes the two highest approximate and 
subsessile, ithe others remote, exsertly :pedunculate, the 
lowest long peduneulate; peduncles two-edged; stigmas 
three ; fruit oval or obovate, nerved, somewhat triquctrous, 
entire and somewhat recurved at the apex, glabrous, be- 
coming yellowish; pistillate scale ovate, mucronate, with a 
seabrous point, the lower scales often long mucronate, about 
equal in Jength to the fruit. Whole plant rather light green 
and glaucous, 
Flowers in May and June. Grows in dry woods and 
meadows; common. Sheffield; Newburgh, N. ¥; Penn- 
Mub. and Schw. 
This plant is excellently described in Muh. Gram. and 
the reference is to ©. eonoidea, Schk. But this is an entirely 
different species from the C. eonoidea, Schk., as is evident 
from the deseription of Muh. and the comparison of speci- 
mens from Muh. in the Herbarium of Mr. Schweinitz. The C. 
granularioides, Schw., described in this Journal Vol. IX. p. 
262, is the true C. conoidea, Schk., and the fig. there refer- 
red to, Tab. A fig. 4, is only a variety of this species of Schk. 
‘Fhe reason of the mistake may appear singular, when it Is 
stated that both these species were correctly ascertained 
nearly two years before that paper was written The mis- 
take, into whieh I was led, is now corrected For some rea- 
son Muh. had changed the plant after Schk. had described 
©. conotdea ; to the plant deseribed by Muh. it becomes 
necessary to give a new name. 
There can be no doubt that the C. conoidea lately de- 
scribed by Mr. Eliiot is the true C. conoidea, though it is 
not the plant intended by Muh. 
