1020 BULLETIN DE l'hERBIER BOISSIER (2«^« SÊR.), (2) 



up by Lexarza ; who was a resident at Morelia in Ihe province of Michoa- 

 can, where he died in Ihe year of pubhcalion of the work cited. This geo- 

 graphica! facl has an important bearing on tlie means of identifying the 

 plant he essayed to describe ; and which was placed among the Anthemi- 

 deœ, as defined by Cassini in Bull. Soc. Philom. 1815. The one species of 

 ihe genus, Abasoloa Taboarda, \v3iS nanied after Emmanuela Taboarda, 

 Ihe worthy and accompHshed wife of Mariano Abasolo, with whom 

 Lexarza seems to have been on terms of platonic friendship. Il is doubl- 

 ful whelher authentic spécimens exist which might throw hght on ihe 

 gênera proposed by Ihese authors. In the comprehensive hst given in 

 .\lph. de Candolle's Phytographie, Iheir names are not mentioned.neither 

 does Cohneiro vouchsafe any information in La Botanica y los Botanicos 

 de la Peninsiila Hispam-Lusitana. In the most récent work on the Mexi- 

 can flora, Sinonimia Vulgär y Cientifica de las Plantas Mexicanas (1902), 

 by José Ramirez, the name of Abasoloa does not oceur. 



The only thing therefore was to go through the malerial of alUed 

 gênera in the collections at Kew |and at the Natural History Museum, 

 to compare Lexarza's description with one or more spécimens. This 

 identification I believe I have found, in a plant collected in 1891 by 

 Pringle in the mountains near Palzcuaro, in the province of Michoacan 

 (n. 4099), and also with anolher collected in 1894 by Pringle on Sierra 

 di San Felipe, in the province of Oaxaca (n. 4921), at 3000 mètres. Bolh 

 of Ihese spécimens, according to Mr. B. L. Robinson, belong to the same 

 species, which was founded on the first of these as — Sabazia Michoa- 

 cana Robinson, in Proc. Amer. Acad. XX^Tf, p. 173 (1892). There 

 seems lo be less disci'epancy between Lexarza's original description and 

 Pringle's planls than there is between spécimens of Sabazia microglossa 

 Cand. and ils variety puberula Cand. On the other band, in S. glabra 

 the plant is very much branched. but the leaves are entire and glabrous. 

 The description given by Bâillon is clearer than that .of Bentham and 

 Hooker. Bâillon foUows the original description in stating that the ligules 

 are disposed in two or three rows, wile the other authors, without 

 adéquate reason, give them as multiseriate, which is misleading. Bâillon 

 points out ils affînity with Eclipta, while ihese say that it differs from 

 (rymnolomia and Sabazia in the narrower ligules disposed in more than 

 one row. In Pringle's n. 4921 the ligules are pale rose-colored or pink, 

 while in n. 4099 they are yellowish, as while flowers oflen become 

 in the dried slale. Lexarza states that his spécimens were collected at 

 S. José del Corral, on the banks of the R. Huehueapa, and that the 



