Davis: Lamarck's evening primrose 531 



come widely distributed, whicli explains its presence in Paris some- 

 what earlier than ?I798, when Lamarck's description was published. 

 Escaping from the gardens, the plant has been reported as growing 

 wild at various stations in England and France. Following in 

 the wake of its distribution to European botanical centers came 

 the inevitable description as new species of forms derived from the 

 original. Oenothera suaveolens Desfontaines and Lamarck's plant, 

 Oenothera Lamarckiana Seringe, were undoubtedly such deriva- 

 tives and must be considered as forms of Oenothera grandiflora 

 Solander. 



The identification of Lamarck's plant with Oenothera grandiflora 

 Solander has very greatly modified, the problem of the origin of 

 " Oenothera Lamarckiana De Vries." The problem has become far 

 more tangible. I have recently (Davis, 191 1, p. 226, and 1912, p. 

 379) criticized adversely the evidence that has been offered to 

 show that Lamarckiana was known previous to 1778 when grandi- 

 flora was introduced into England. With Lamarck's plant 

 assigned to grandiflora we pass from the eighteenth century to 

 periods when we may hope for more direct evidence than that 

 furnished by the old accounts and figures. 



We know that as a cultivated plant handled by seedsmen 0. 

 Lamarckiana first appeared about i860, when it was placed on the 

 market by the firm of Carter and Company of London, who state 

 that their seed came from Texas. The identification by Lindley 

 of these plants with 0. Lamarckiana Seringe was undoubtedly in- 

 correct. I have recently described and figured (Davis, 1912, p. 417) 

 certain well preserved specimens of an Oenothera in the Gray Herb- 

 arium froni a plant grown at Cambridge, Massachusetts, by Dr. 

 Asa Gray in 1862. Evidence is there given which indicates that 

 this plant held a close genetical relationship to these same cultures 

 of Carter and Company, perhaps not more than one or two genera- 

 tions removed from the original plants. These specimens show 

 characters in part those of De Vries's Lamarckiana and in part like 

 grandiflora. If this plant grown by Dr. Gray was representative 

 of the cultures of Carter and Company their plants must have 

 differed from the Lamarckiana of today in a number of important 

 particulars. I regard this herbarium sheet as the most important 

 now known bearing on the problem of the origin of Oenothera 

 Lamarckiana. Its relation to the writer's working hypothesis that 



