44 Contributions from the Gray Herbarium 
tion is included among a list of plants collected by Dr. Palmer at 
Lagoon Head. Our specimen, however, which purports to be a 
part of the type material, is Palmer no. 801 from San Quentin. 
“ Cryptantha holoptera (Gray), comb. nov. Eritrichiwm holopterum 
Gray, Proc. Am. Acad. xii. 81 (1877). Krynitzkia holopterum Gray, 
1. ¢. xx. 276 (1885). Oreocarya holoptera Greene, Pitt. i. 58 (1887). 
When Dr. Gray described this species he compared it with C. mu- 
ricata and C. leiocarpa, both typical Cryptanthas. Later (1. c.) he 
placed it between C. pterocarya and O. setosissima, and it is in 
C. pterocarya that it finds its nearest relative. Just why Dr. Greene 
made it a part of Oreocarya is not apparent. It is true that its 
nutlets are winged after the manner of those of O. setosissima but 
in that plant the pedicels are firmly persistent, in perfect accord 
with the generic character. Moreover, the plant is an Oreocarya 
in aspect, as noticed by Dr. Gray. These facts are not true of 
C. holoptera. Its pedicels are rather readily deciduous and its aspect 
is exactly that of a Cryptantha. The proper disposition of this 
plant must strengthen Oreocarya immeasurably because Oreocarya 
has very little besides aspect to keep it out of Cryptantha (a fact 
realized by its author, l.c. 115). Nevertheless, these genera are 
always so readily recognized in the field that no one who knows 
them there would think of uniting them. 
~CRYPTANTHA PTEROCARYA (Torr.) Greene, var. cycloptera 
(Greene), comb. nov. Cryptantha cycloptera Greene, Pitt. i. 120 
(1887). CoLorapo: Grand Junction, May, 1892, Alice Eastwood. 
Uran: southern Utah, 1874, Parry. New Mexico: 1851-1852, 
Wright, no. 1570; rocky hillside, Nutt Mt., Sierra Co., May 11, 
1905, Metcalfe, no. 1573. Arizona: Lowell, May, 1884, W. F. 
Parish, no. 167; near Camp Lowell, April, 1881, Pringle, no. 366; 
Verde River, April 6, 1867, Dr. Smart, no. 132; hills near Tucson, 
April 15, 1884. Catrrornia: Surprise Canyon, Panamint Mts., 
April 21, 1891, Coville & Funston, no. 720. 
When Dr. Greene described this plant, Bull. Calif. Acad. i. 207 
(1885), he accredited it with three characteristics, ‘‘ nutlets all 
winged; wings . . . continuous across the base [of the nutlet]; 
ventral face not muricate.” Dr. Gray, commenting in the Synopti- 
cal Flora upon these characters, wrote that they “do not hold 
out.” But more recently Mr. Coville, after collecting both species 
in the Death Valley, wrote (Contrib. Nat. Herb. iv. 165), that he 
“had not found a satisfactory series of intergrades ”’ and accord- 
