R. BROWN’S LIST OF MADEIRA PLANTS 43 
' The note quoted above from Lowe shows that the words “ ex 
parte ’’ should be added after ‘‘ Soland.”’ in the above eremin and 
that there should be a second entry in the Kew Index, 
nudicaule Soland. MSS. ex parte, ex Lowe, FI. Mad, i, 585 = 
ivtum 
CrEPIS CRENATA [a mEEHa for crinita. Tolpis umbellata Bertol.} 
C. auricunata, C. TA 
C. auriculata and C. comata are b secuce? by Lowe (Fl. Mad. i 
557), after careful comparison, to one species, which he calls Ba ke 
hausia hieracioides F, Schultz, oe wnsfertd this to Crepis, and Schultz 
Bipontinus renamed it C. Lowei, the name hieracioides being pre- 
occupied in Crepis. It seems ale, Crea, that the species must 
stand as C. comata, for it is retained in the Index Kewensis, where 
C. Lowei also stands, that being the name first puke shed with de- 
sige to ee Crepis. 'The synonymy is as follow 
Creris comata Br. in Buch anes Ins. 194, ~ 228 oe 
ee en; Banks & Sol. MSS. & Herb. ! ex Lowe, Prim. 2 
(1831); DC. Prodr. vii. 157 (183 re 
Borkhausia comata Lowe 1. ¢. ; DC. l.c. (Barkhausia). 
C. auriculata Br. in euch Len. 34 (nomen) ; Sol. ex Lowe, 
Fl. Mad. i. 557 (186 
B. hieracioides Lowe, Pain, 28 (1831); DC. 1 
C. hieracioides F. Schultz in Flora, xxiii. 718 (1840) ; Lowe, 
Fl, Mad. i. 556 (1888) ; non aliorum 
C. Lowei Sch. Bip. in Webb & Berth. Phyt. Canar, ii. 461 
1850), excl. var. 
C. Diosco SavRs C. BrENNrs [C. laciniata Lowe.] 
LA’ 
C. pian  Potpis macrorhiza DC. Lowe (Fl. Mad. i. 524) 
points out, and Watson (Godman, Azores, 184) concurs, that the 
Tolpis macrorhiza of Azorean catalogues was 7’. nobilis, and that the 
former had not been found in the Azores. Mr. Trelease (Sth Beene 
ae Bot. Gard. t. 83) figures as an Azorean plant what seems 
o be T. macror hiza ede the name of 7’, nobilis var, petiolaris. Our 
ee including under macrorhiza the type of the 
species collected by Masson, Mandon’s no. 160, and many from 
we, and under nobilis specimens from Masson, Drouet, Nuttall 
(the type of his Calodonta azorica), and Hunt (distributed by Watson. 
as J’, macrorhiza), all of which agree with Seubert’s figure (Fl. Azorica, 
t. 11)—seems to justify the retention of the two as distinct. It may 
be, re that, as suggested by Mr. Trelease, all are forms of 
one extremely variable species; his figures (t. 34, figs. 1, 2) 
certainly bear little resemblance to penpert s plate, or to any of the 
specimens in the National Herbariu I should be inclined to 
lace under macr orhiza a Flores Feces from Drouet labelled 
‘© T, nobilis Hochst. ? 
TENUIFOLIA, SUCOULENTA, FILIFoRMIS [Tolpis fruticosa Schrank. ] 
PINNATIFIDA, DE [A. cheiranthifolia 
L’Hérit. according to Lowe (Fl. Mad.), who cites the above. 
under one or other of -his forms of this very variable spec In 
ria 
Index Kewensis Lowe’s name for the species ye varia) Le from 
