122 



SHORTER NOTES 



The Validity of the Genus Paratheria Griseb. — In work- 

 ing over some material recently collected by Mr. A. H. Curtiss 

 on the Isle of Pines, just to the south of Cuba, a peculiar grass 

 was encountered which proved somewhat of a puzzle for a time. 

 Investigation showed that it is Paratheria prostrata Griseb. (Cat. 

 PI. Cub. 236. 1866), a grass, which, so far as material at hand 

 indicates, has been collected in Cuba but once — by Wright in 

 the year 1865, the type of the genus. It must therefore be rare 

 in herbaria, and its rediscovery by Mr. Curtiss is consequently 

 of interest and value. The genus Paratheria is referred by 

 Hackel to Clianiacrapliis, and it appears also to have been con- 

 sidered in this light by Col. Munro, for Sauvalle (Fl. Cub. 200) 

 has published a CJianiaerapJiis parviglinna Munro, a nomen sub- 

 nudum, however ; this is based upon Wright's no. 3909. I 

 cannot find this number in our collections, but I do find a 3906 

 labeled as above, and I suspect therefore that the 3909 is a typo- 

 graphical error for 3906. 



I cannot agree with the disposition of this genus made by both 

 Hackel and Munro, and must consider it as distinct from Chavt- 

 acrapliis, for reasons which will be given below. ChaniaerapJiis 

 was based on an Australian grass which the author named C. 

 hordeacea. At first sight, the superficial resemblance of the two 

 genera is quite marked, but a study of the spikelets discloses 

 differences which make it desirable to keep them apart. In 

 Chaniaeraphis the first two scales of the spikclet are empty, the 

 first one very small, the second as long as the spikelet ; the third 

 scale encloses a staminate (lower ; the fourth scale, which is only 

 about one half as long as the spikelet, contains a pistillate flower, 

 but no stamens, so far as our material indicates ; this is also in 

 conformity with the original description of brown, the author of 

 Chauiacraphis. In Paratheria, the first three scales are empty, 

 the first and second very small, almost rudimentary, the third as 

 long as the spikelet ; while the fourth encloses a perfect flower. 

 These differences in scale and floral structure, reinforced by the 



