CACTACEZ OF THE BOUNDARY. 215 
28. O. resseLLata, E. in Pacif. Rail. Rep. (0. ramosissima, E. in Sillim. Journ. 1852). — This curious species 
was first noticed by Dr. Parry, and described, as ‘above cited, in an account of his California Cactacew, under the name 
of 0. ramosissima ; which, being deemed an improper name in a section where all could claim it with equal and some 
with greater justice, it was changed in the account of Dr. Bigelow’s plants, who brought specimens of the wood, the 
branches, and the fruit. Mr. Schott, the third botanist who collected it, was fortunate enough to find the flowers. 
Living ae are yet a desideratum in our gardens. 
species ce in arid sandy soil, from the Sierra Madre south of the Gila to the lower Colorado, Bill 
Williams's Fork, and the California mountains. Mr. Schott found it in September with flower and ripe fruit. The 
flower is purple, about 6 lines in diameter ; the clavate ovary is of the same length, and bears 40 or 50 very tomentose 
but scarcely spiny or bristly pulvilli; the 5 petals are almost orbicular ; the exterior filaments are broad and 
persistent (sterile s staminodia ?) ; 5 stigmata short pi erect. The fruit resembles very much those of the clavate 
9 or 10 lines long, dry, ovate, and contracted above; the narrow and deep umbilicus contains the 
remains of the flower, the above- mentioned broad tae being most conspicuous ; ; externally it is covered with a 
a a of hair-like flexuous bristles of a red-brown color, 2-3 lines in length, mixed with dense wool. Seeds thick, 
with a broad spongy commissure, 1.8-2.0 lines in buitahinn Mr. Schott collected in May other greenish-yellow flowers 
from similar bushes, which he considers as of a distinct variety. The ovary in these flowers appears elongated, and is 
probably sterile, and would have become persistent and proliferous, as we find it in many other Opuntie ; so that this 
green-flowered form probably is not a variety of our species, but a degeneration. 
CORRECTIONS TO THE CACTACEZ OF THE BOUNDARY. 
A voyage to Europe, since my paper has gone through the press, has afforded me the advantage not only of the per- [73] 
sonal intercourse with numerous men of science and many cultivators, but also of an actual examination of various large 
collections of living Cactacee. Some of the results of my investigations, as far as they bear upon the ‘‘ Cactacee of the Boun- 
dary,” have been incorporated with the list of corrections of typographical errors. 
Page 2, line 22= page 177, line 9. Sepalis petalisque. It will scarcely be necessary to inform the reader that the 
numerous foliaceous integuments of the cactus-flower do not very properly range under the divisions of sepals and petals. For 
convenience’ sake, however, the exterior more herbaceous ones are called sepals, and the interior ones, with thinner texture and 
brighter color, are named petals. The ‘‘ ae usually are more numerous than the “ petals,” and in most genera form a com- 
plete transition from the organs — which on the stem represent the leaves (usually with their spiny appendages) — to the petals. 
On the ovary they usually resemble ai - mer, which, among other reasons, seems to give color to the suggestion of Zuccarini 
- in t = note to page 39, line 52. 
e 12 = page 177, line = I follow me Candolle in ae as one of the characters of the ~— the number 
of the more ts spirals of the tubercles in Mamillarie and cylindric Opuntia, just as we describe the number of ribs of 
Echinocacti or Cerei. It is now well known that no pectoris can be sickiaa from the direction of the s aila to the right or 
left. It is also known that the greater or less prominence of one or the other spiral depends on the number and crowded state 
of the tubercles and the comparative thickness and elongation of the axis. The characters deduced therefrom are not absolute, 
nor are they quite scientific. It would be more exact to state the phyllotactic law of the arrangement of the tubercles, I would 
have to say that M. micromeris has its tubercles arranged after the 43 or even the 3} system. But I suppose the plan followed 
by me is more intelligible to most readers, and not much less clear to the scientific phylotaxist. 
Page 5, line 4= page 178, line 8. M. mécrothele is well distinguished from our species by its much larger tubercles and 
2 err soul and short central spines. 
5, line 836 = page 178, line 33. The pale yellow spines look like fibres of raw silk, and form a silk-like tuft, but are 
not a Pi a brush, as the original edition had it 
e 7 = page 179. M. Grahami is sarily rete to M. Schelhasii, Pfr., from Real del Monte, Mexico. The [74] 
next species, M. Wrightii, is closely allied to M. zep, nthoides, Scheidw., from Oaxaca, Mexico. Without the flower, 
however, and especially without the fruit and seed, agen latter has never been paid attention to, — these plants can scarcely 
be sufficiently well characterized me their ee ascertained. 
Page 9 = page 180. M. sph 0 closely allied to the Mexican M. Longimamma, DC. 
hee 10, line 41 = page 181, line 54. The eae here described as a variety exactly agrees with some original specimens of 
M. Scheerii preserved in the collection of Prince Salm-Dyck. It will not be useless here to urge the importance of preserving 
the dead cactus plants, or, as these specimens are fancifully called, the “skeletons.” I have been materially assisted by being 
able to examine the skeletons of some authentic original specimens, of which no living ones are now found in the gardens; but 
pron: the dead plants are thrown aside, and a description, often vague or incomplete, or at best an indifferent figure, is all that 
is left for future identification. Unscrupulous gardeners and traders do their best to increase the confusion. 
> 
