370 



A REVISION OF THE GENUS CHELIDONIUM 



David PRAI^f 



In the course of an extended examination of the natural order 

 Papaveraceœ whicn bas occupied my attention during a visit to Europe 

 it bas been found necessary to enlarge considerably tbe liants of tbe 

 genus CJielidonium. Tbe reasons tbat bave led to tbis extension will be 

 made apparent in tbe course of tbe révision of species wbicb follows; 

 it will be sufficient for tbe moment to state tbat, as bere understood, 

 tbe genus is made to include not oiily tbe Chelidonium of tbe majority 

 of récent writers, wbicb bas been admirably definèd by Messrs Bentbam 

 and Hooker in tbe Genera Plantarum and by Mr Bâillon in tbe Histoire 

 des Plantes but also tbe gênera Stylophorum of Nuttall, Hylomecon of 

 Maximowicz and Dicranostigma of Hooker and Tbomson. Of tbese 

 three tbe last named bas been reduced by its autbors to Stylophorum; 

 tbe second bas also witb its autbors approbation been referred to tbe 

 same genus. Recently, however, Messrs Prantl and Kundig bave proposed 

 to restore Hylomecon to a generic position and bave inclined to the 

 view that Dicranostigma sbould ratber be referred to tbis resuscitated 

 Hylomecon tban to Stylophorum. It sbould be added also tbat botb 

 Stylophorum and Hylomecon, on tbe occasion of tbeir first being de- 

 scribed, were referred by tbeir respective autbors to CJielidoniwn; to 

 tins view Mr Franchet bas recently returned. 



That the four groups of forms indicated by thèse naines must be 

 very elosely related will be clear l'rom tbe above résumé of the treat- 

 ment they bave received at the hands of tbe very able taxonomists by 

 wbom they hâve from time to time been examincd and though it is 



