30 Contributions from the Gray Herbarium 
belliferae. If Drudeophytum and Deweya are not to be distinguished 
satisfactorily what can be said of the relationship of this group of 
species to Tauschia? According to Coulter & Rose, 1. ¢. 79, 
Drudeophytum is “more distinct from Deweya than is Deweya 
from Tauschia.”’ If this is true the case at the start seems to be 
pretty weak for Deweya which is distinguished (according to the 
same author) by “ its very sharp prominent ribs, prominent and 
persistent calyx teeth, as well as in its range.” As regards the 
ribs they are quite as prominent in 7’. edulis as they are in D. arguta; 
in the former, however, they are obtuse. The calyx-teeth of 
Tauschia are obsolete, it is true, but Drudeophytum contains some 
species with conspicuous, others with merely evident, and still 
others obsolete calyx-teeth, so that this seems obviously to be a 
valueless character for generic discrimination. If Deweya (in- 
cluding Drudeophytum) is distinct from Tauschia, therefore, It 
must rest on the one character, the acute ribs of the fruit, a char- 
acter which, as shown above, is more or less relative. But now 
the problem is only partially presented. There is yet another 
group of species which has been retained as a distinct genus, 
Museniopsis. This genus has the obsolete calyx teeth of Tauschia 
but the ternately compound leaves of Drudeophytum and, accord- 
ing to Coulter & Rose, Prog. Wash. Acad. Sci. i. 116 (1900), 
Contrib. U. S. Nat. Herb. vii. 24 (1900), the ‘slender and more oF 
less indistinct ribs ” of the latter genus. But more recently Rose, 
Contrib. U. S. Nat. Herb. viii. 337 (1905), has referred without 
question a new species to Museniopsis (M. fusiformas) which has 
the very prominent thick and obtuse ribs that generally character- 
ize the fruits of Tauschia. T. filiformis Coult. & Rose, on saree 
hand, exhibits fruits with the thin wings of certain species 
Museniopsis. Coulter & Rose have attached what seems to me 
undue significance to the manner in which the seed-face, certain 
of these groups, is sulcate. The seed face of Deweya, Drud d 
tum and Tauschia is involute but in varying degree of depth pe 
width. The seed face of Museniopsis is merely deeply suleate § 
the variation in this respect found in the other groups reise 
whatever importance might otherwise be attached to this ial 
acter as indicating generic values. Furthermore, M. arguia ol fe 
Contrib. U. 8. Nat. Herb. viii. 336 (1905), has the deeply nvo'™ 
seed face of species of Drudeophytum although the author does 
- 
