\\Q THE JOURNAL OF BOTANY 



3017) does not belong to Pavetta, as there are several ovules in 

 each cell of the ovary. It is a species of Tarenna (or, as Dr. Krause, 

 following Schumann, wonld call it, of Chomelia), and is very close 

 to, and "possibly identical with, Zenker 1343, distributed as Cho- 



iferta var. macrantha 



PsYCHOTRIA. AI 



/< 



& K. Krause. This is founded ou Kamier 307, and, as it agrees 

 with a specimen at Kew sent from Berlin as P. amboniana K. 

 Sebum., was so named by me (/. c. p. 853). As regards Kassner 

 185, also referred my me (I.e.) to P. amboniana, I have since recorded 

 my belief (in manuscript) that this specimen may belong to P.albido* 

 calyx K. Sebum., as it is similar to Kew specimens thus named. 



[To the above note it may be added that in his interesting 

 account of the plants of the Transvaal and Khodesia observed 

 during the journey of the British Association in 1905 (Sitz. K. 

 Preuss. Akad. Wissensch. lii. 866-906) Prof. Engler makes no 

 reference to any of the species described by Mr. Moore in several 

 papers in this Journal during the last five years, and especially in 

 the paper on Mr. Eyles's Bhodesian plants (Journ. Bot. 1905, 

 44-54). It is of course possible that Dr. Engler may have met 

 with none of the numerous novelties described by Mr. Moore, but 

 this seems hardly probable in view of the fact that the new species 

 described by Mr. E. G. Baker in our pages from the same collec- 

 tions are frequently referred to. In view of future publication of 

 plants from the same region, it seems desirable to call attention to 

 these papers, especially as it is evident from Mr. Moore's remarks 

 printed above that the danger lest work should be overlooked is by 

 no means an imaginary one. 



It is to be regretted that the Vienna Congress, when dealing 

 with tbe question of quoting authorities for names, did not point 

 but the desirability of something like uniformity in citation. It 

 might be thought that such a recommendation was unnecessary, 

 and that at least the same writer in the same paper (or at any rate 

 in the same paragraph) would quote the same author in the same 

 way, and would refrain from citing two authors in a precisely 

 similar manner. That such an anticipation would not be justified is 

 shown by Prof. Engler's paper. On p. 892, in the space of fifteen 

 lines, he quotes Mr. E. G. Baker in four different ways : Ekebergid 

 arborea "Baker," Lessertia stipulate " G. Baker," Dolichos Wei- 

 witschii var. Randii <G. Bale," and Triumfetta Mastersii "Bak. f." 

 Only the last of these can be correct ; the more usual forms are 

 "E. G. Baker" and " Baker fil.," which do not appear. This is 

 bad enough, but a further complication arises in the citation of 

 JRhynehoria- antennulifera « G. Bak.," which in this instance means 

 J. G. Baker ! Mr. Spencer Moore enjoys perhaps a greater variety 

 of citation ; he tells us that he has seen himself referred to as 

 Moore, Le Moore, Le M. Moore, S. Moore, Sp. Moore, Spenc. 

 Moore, Spencer Moore, Spencer Le M. Moore, Spencer Le Mar- 

 chant Moore, and P. Moore ! But in this case the name gives 

 scope for variety, and the citations extend over a wide range of time 

 and place.— Ed. Joubn. Bot.] 



