= Sphaerocarpos Michelii Bell. App. ad Fl. Pedem. 52. 1792. 

 Stexophyllus stexophyllus (Ell.) Britton, Bull. Torrey 



Club. 21: 30. 1894. 



= Stenophyllus caespitosus (Muhl.) Raf. Neog. 4. 1525. 

 Terxatea Terxatea (L.) Kuntze, Rev. Gen. PI. 3: 72. 1893. 



= Ternatea vulgaris H. B. K. Nov. Gen. & Sp. PI. 6: 415. 

 1823. 

 Trionum Trionum (L.) YYooton & Standi., Contrib. U. S. 



Nat. Herb. 19:417. 1915. 



— Trionum annuum Medic. Gesch. Malv. Fam. 47. 1787. 

 Tsuga Tsuga (Sieb. & Zucc.) A. Murr., Proc. Hort. Soc. Lond. 



2: 508. 1862. 



= Tsuga Sieboldii Carr. Trait. Gen. Conif., ed. 1, 186. 1855. 



In the above-mentioned article [p. 146] I made the state- 

 ment, in effect, that Foeniculum vulgare is the oldest valid name 

 within the genus Foeniculum for the plant designated by Kars- 

 ten as Foeniculum Foeniculutn. I gave as the authority and 

 citation for F. vulgare, "Hill, Brit. Herb. 413. 1756." Actually, 

 however, according to the international rules of nomenclature, 

 the binomial Foeniculum vulgare was not validly published by 

 Hill in the reference cited above, because Hill in this work does 

 not consistently adopt the binomial system of nomenclature. 

 The 450 or more binomials which appear in his "British Herbal" 

 are only accidental binomials and are on this account specifi- 

 cally invalidated by the international rules, even though no less 

 an authority than Druce [Rep. Bot. Exch. CI. Brit. Isles 3: 

 439. 1913] maintains that whether accidental or not, these bi- 

 nomials should be recognized as valid. In accordance with the 

 international rules as adopted at Cambridge, however, the name 

 Foeniculum vulgare must be accredited to Philip Miller, who 

 first validly published it in the eighth edition of his "Gardeners 

 Dictionary" in 1768. The paragraph should therefore read as 

 follows: 



Foexiculum Foexiculum (L.) Karst. Deutsch. Fl. 868. 1882. 

 = Foeniculum vulgare Mill. Gard. Diet., ed. 8, no. 1. 1768. 



A study of the synonymy of several common polygonaceous 

 plants of this region has revealed the fact that two new nomen- 

 clatural combinations are required. These, with the synonymy 

 of the species in question, are given herewith: 



