Professor Dewey'' s Caricography , 271 



3. C. stipata. Muh. 



Pursh, Muh. Eaton, and Pers. 



Schk. tab. Hhh. fig. 132. 



C vulpinoidea. Mx. 

 This very distinct species is well described, but Pursh has 

 quoted C vulpinoidea Mx. as a sy nonyme of C. muhlenbergii, 

 Schk. There can be little doubt, however, from Mx'. de- 

 scription and his popular remark that it is closely allied to C. 

 Tulpina as well as the remark of Muh. to the same pur- 

 pose, that C vulpinoidea, is the same as C stipata, C. muh- 

 lenbergii has very little resemblance to C. vulpina, and is 

 readily distinguished by its approximate spikelets, its com- 

 pressed roundish ovate fruit, ciliate serrate at the apex, and 

 its ovate scale long as the fruit and terminating in a mii- 

 cronate point, extending beyond the fruit. 



4. C. retroflexa. Muh. 

 Pursh, Muh, Eaton, and Pers. 

 Schk. tab. Kkk. fig. 140. 



This species and C. rosea, Schk. tab. Zzz, fig. 179, are 

 very liable to be confounded, because one other particular 

 has not been introduced into the specific descriptions. 

 Muh. indeed says it may perhaps be a smaller variety of C. 

 rosea. Though they resemble each other, Schk. and authors 

 generally, consider them as distinct species. The great 

 difference between them is the following. In C. retroflexa, 

 the scale of the fruit is ovate acute, ovate-lanceolate, or ob- 

 long-lanceolate, and xery nearly as long as the fruit j the 

 spikelets are nearer together, and the fruit ovate-lanceolate. 

 In C. rosea, the scale of the fruit is ovate obtuse, and about 

 half the length of the fruit ; the fruit is less distinctly ovate 

 or more nearly oblong-lanceolate, 



Muhlenberg says that C. rosea is C. radiata, Wahl. Un- 

 der C. stellulata, Schreb. and Schk. tab. C. fig. 14, Wah- 

 lemberg describes a variety, C. radiata, found in this coun- 

 try. His description corresponds exactly to the small sub- 

 bristly flaccid culm — the narrow leaves— the small bristly 

 bracts — and the sub-distant three flowered spikelets of C. ro- 

 sea, found in our woods. But in placing it under C. stellu- 

 lata, which has staminate flowers below and not above, like 

 C. retroflexa, and C. rosea, Wahl. could not have consid- 

 ered the different position of the staminate flowers in the 



