[Pkoc. Koy. Soc. Victoria, 32 (N.S ), Pt. 11., 1920.] 



Art. XV. — A revision of the genus Fultenaea, Fart 1, 



BY. H. J5. WILLIAMSON. 



(With Plates Xlll., XIV. aud XV.). 

 [Kead November tJth, 1919]. 



It is only natural that in large genera more confusion is likely^ 

 to occur than in small ones, and some time ago Professor Ewart 

 advised me that a general revision of the genus Pultenaea would 

 probably yield profitable r^ults, and was indeed urgently neces- 

 sary. Ihe results of the first part of this investigation, based on 

 the examination of the material at the National HerbariunI, Mel- 

 bourne, and of specimens received from the Government Botanists- 

 of the other States, are here given. 



The genus Pultenaea is confined to Australia, and comprises 92 

 acknowledged species. Seventy-five species are described in Ben- 

 tham's Flora Australiensis, two of which have been transferred to- 

 other genera, and one reduced to a variety. The species since 

 described number 20, comprising those set up by Mueller (3), Tate 

 (2), Black (2), Maiden (3), Maiden and Betche (2), Bailey (1), 

 Baker (2), Scott (1), Andrews (1), Pritzel (1), and Kegel (1). No^ 

 labelled specimen of either of the last three is in the Herbarium. 



The approximate distribution is — Queensland, 11 species; New 

 South Wales, 45; Victoria, 37; Tasmania, 13; South Australia, 22;. 

 and Western Australia, 22. 



About half of the species are confined to one State; about 20 are- 

 recorded foi- two States, 10 for three States, and 6 species are 

 widely spread — four States. As with other genera, few of the 

 Western Australian species — two — occur east of the limits of that 

 State, one of which extends to South-West Victoria. It is worthy 

 of note that in the Flora of the Northern Ten-itory, Ewart and 

 Davies, 1917, the genus is not mentioned, and that very few records 

 of Pultenaea exist for Western Australia outside the south-western 

 district of that State. 



While attempting a revision of the genus in which, judging by^ 

 evidence of labelled and unlabelled specimens in the National 

 Herbarium, much confusion exists, it is not claimed that finality 

 can now be reached with regard to certain groups, for the occur- 

 rence of forms that seem to connect the members of those groups^ 

 presents much difficulty. Considering the varying forms for 

 example, of the group known under Eupultenaea, an advocate for 



