354 BOTANICAL GAZETTE [May 
3.cm. long and 3mm. wide; while those of O. Lamarckiana may 
measure 2.5 cm. in length and 6 mm. in width, making a ratio of 
4° in the one case and + in the other.” The description of the 
fruits as short, as given by LAMARCK, evidently points to the second 
and not to the first case.”3 
Summing up the main results of this discussion, we find that 
specimen A of the herbarium of Lamarck closely corresponds 
to the O. Lamarckiana Ser. of the present time, and has been taken 
by almost all authors for its prototype. The specimen B differs 
from it in its general aspect, in the words “‘odore grato” on its 
label, and in the opinion of Porret that it belongs to O. grandi- 
flora Ait., this opinion pointing to long and narrow fruits. Per- 
sonally, it impressed me as having been brought into the herbarium 
of Lamarck only later on, and as having been placed in the cover 
of O. grandiflora Lam. with a doubt shown by the placing of the 
name in brackets. : 
The best proof for the fact that A and not B is the authentic 
specimen of O. grandiflora Lam. is perhaps given by the specimen 0 
the herbarium of Father Pourret, which was given to the Muséum 
d’Histoire Naturelle by Dr. BARBIER in 1847. It bears the name 
Ocenothera grandiflora Lam. written in the clear and beautiful hand- 
writing of the clerk of Pourret. In the same cover there is another 
sheet of Pourret’s collection, on which the same clerk wrote 
Oenothera biennis. Unfortunately, Davis, who did not visit the 
Museum, has mistaken this one for the one studied by me,” and 
has accordingly published a photograph (pl. 38) and a description 
of it. It is easily seen that this specimen really comes nearet to 
our present O. biennis L. than to anything else. 
* L’Oenothera grandiflora de Vherbier de LAMARCK, op. cit. fig. 1, 6 and ¢. 
%3 DAVIS (op. cit. p. 523) lays great stress on the tips of the sepals, but S : 
find a well defined difference between the two species in this character. : " tis 
attention to the word “sétacé” in LaAmarcx’s description of the ioe on “ 
has been translated by De Vries (Mutations-Theorie, p. 317. 1901) as “dicke.” 2 
French, however, is from the late Latin word whee derived from “‘seta, 
hair or bristle. The meaning, therefore, is exactly the opposite of pores! DAVIS, 
De Vries.” If the reader will kindly look up my book = = page quoted by 
he will find that I have translated “sétacé” by “fad 
The Mutation Theory, Engl. ed. 1:442, note 2. 
8 Bull. Torr. Bot. Club op. cit. p. 527. 
