

94 BOTANICAL GAZETTE [august 



*. 



investigations subsequently, was eminently well versed in their 

 species. His treatment assumes almost the aspect of a monographic 

 revision, and it is evident that he possessed much more than an 

 ordinary knowledge of Bidens and related groups. His brilliancy, 

 however, appears to have been manifested, as is so apt to occur 

 with a local botanist, less in the excellence of his genus concept 

 than in that of his species concept. And, even in the latter respect, 

 his generalizations are often necessarily faulty because of the 

 inadequacy of his material. Hillebrand, like Gray, appears 

 never to have seen Schultz Bipontinus' paper. He discarded 

 Gray's treatment, however, and adopted once again Cassini's 

 name Campylotheca. Speaking of Campylotheca he says (p. 211): 

 The genus, as it presents itself now, stands evidently nearer to 

 Bidens than to Coreopsis, and might be merged in the former if it 

 were not for the winged achenes of so many species, 3 which, if 

 admitted in the character of Bidens, would efface the limits between 

 that genus and Coreopsis" Gray's Hawaiian Bidens is trans- 

 ferred by Hillebrand to Campylotheca. 



This effort to break down the genus Bidens into smaller units 

 is not the first of its kind. As early as 1790, 4 Necker (Elem. Bot. 

 1:86-87) subdivided the genus into two new genera. For these 

 he proposed the names Pluridens and Edwarsia; the first group 

 to include those species with simple foliage (for example, Bidens 

 cernua L.), the second to include those species with foliage dis- 

 sected (for example, B. pilosa L. and B. pinnata L.). In 1794, 

 Moench (Meth. 569 and 595) followed Necker's treatment essen- 

 tially, but substituted the names Bidens and Kerneria for Necker's 

 two names. Neither Necker's treatment nor that of Moench is 

 today accepted by botanists. In 1836, De Candolle (Prodr. 

 5:633) described a new plant that resembled Bidens, but which 

 appeared remarkable in having the ligules pistillate and fertile. 

 De Candolle created the genus Delucia therefor, and his new 



named 



Later Schultz Bipontinus 



eem. Bot. Voy. Herald 308. 1852-1857) renamed 



name 





3 Regarding the inaccuracy of this statement, cf. footnote 8 



4 Cf. E. L. Greene, Pittonia 4:245. 1901. 





