Macbride — North American Spermatophytes 59 
The true state of affairs would seem to be more correctly repre- 
sented by treating the southern plant, C. filifolius, as a geographi- 
eal variant of C. rigidus, from which it may be distinguished by the 
narrower leaves and more strongly setose-hispid bracts. Abrams 
is mistaken, however, in thinking that C. rigidus does not occur in 
southern California since a specimen in the Gray Herbarium col- 
lected by Dr. Palmer in 1876 on “‘ hills behind San Diego ”’ matches 
well material from Monterey County where Douglas probably 
secured the original collection. The variety brevibracteatus is in 
some respects intermediate to the typical form and the variety 
filifolius but the fewer flowers in the head distinguish it. Besides 
the original collection from Kern County there is a specimen in 
this herbarium from Tulare County secured in 1891 by Coville & 
Funston, no. 1602. 
STENOTOPSIS 1 ee (DC.) Rydb., var. interior (Coville), 
comb. nov. S. interior (Coville) Rydb. Bull. Torr. Club xxvii. 617 
(1900). SE (ira interior cela Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash. vii. 65 
(1892). A. lanearifolius DC., var. interior (Coville) fey ne 
Cal. Acad. ser. 2, v. 697 (1895). Stenotus linearifolius (D C)T 
G., var. interior (Coville) Hall, Univ. Cal. Publ. Bot. iii. 48 fining 
Doctor Hall,,1. ¢., has given conclusive proof of the intergrada- — 
tion of this desert form with the typical state of the species. I 
think that Dr. Rydberg is right, however, in retaining the genus 
Stenotopsis as distinct from Stenotus. 
