96 Muhlenbergia, Volume 2 



are more rounded and broader in our plant, which is rather dif^ 

 fuse, the branches not rising far above the ground. It agrees 

 much better with the plant collected by Greene himself near 

 Comptonville, Yuba county, also cited under the original de- 

 scription. 



No. 7876, collected May 27, near the railroad a short dis- 

 tance above Redding, Shasta county, the plants tall, two or three 

 feet, erect, growing among or near shrubs. This has fewer, 

 longer and less stellate hairs on the stem than the type, most of 

 them merely forked, but it has the fruit characters of asprella, 



SiDALCEA CAMPESTRis Greene, Bull. Cal. Acad. 1: 76. 1885. 



No. 7987, collected June 5, on the plateau above Shasta 

 Springs, Siskiyou county, growing in dry sandy soil in open 

 places in the woods. It is not typical being much less pubes- 

 cent, and has fewer, more spicate flowers than the type. The 

 label of the type bears -no other record than "Pacific coast 

 plants," and "dry prairies, July 1881, but Mr. Howell probably 

 got it somewhere in Oregon. 



SiDALCEA MALVAEFLORA (Moc. & Sesse) Gray, PI. Wright. 1 : 

 16. 1852. 



Sida malvaefiora Moc. & Sesse in DC. Prodr. 1: 474. 1824. 



Sidalcea hu^nilis Gray, Mem. Am. Acad. II. 4: 30. 1849. 



Sidalcea delphinifolia var. humilis Greene, Fl. Fran. 106. 

 1891. 



No. 7830, collected May 5, in moist places along the rail- 

 road near Tehachapi, Kern county. These plants are much 

 less pubescent than those from the coast region, but otherwise 

 do not seem to differ. The type locality is given as "in Mex- 

 ico," but in the Synoptical Flora Gray says "doubtless collected 

 at Monterey" [California] . If this latter supposition is correct, 

 the name .S. hiimilis is necessarilv a svnonvm. 



