52 Contributions from the Gray Herbarium 
may be noticed that this genus is omitted, no doubt inadvertently, 
from Rydberg’s Flora of the Rocky Mts. and Adjacent Plains. 
/ KRAMERIA PARVIFOLIA Benth., var. glandulosa (Rose & Painter), 
comb. nov. K. glandulosa Rose & Painter, Contrib. U. S. Nat. 
Herb. x. 108 (1906). — Uran: St. George, 1875, Palmer; Parry, 
31. New Mexico: Wright, 939. Artzona: 1867, Palmer; Fort. 
Whipple, 1865, Cowes & Palmer, 161; Grand Canon, 1885, Gray. 
ExIco: Sonora, 1857, Thurber. 
/KRAMERIA PARVIFOLIA Benth., var. imparata, var. nov., foliis 
dense canescentibus plerumque 5-8 mm. longis non glandulosis. — 
Urau: St. Thomas, Goodding, 704. Nevapa: Bunkerville, Good- 
ding, 755; Las Vegas, Goodding, 2238. Arizona: Ft. Lowell, 
Tucson, 1880, Lemmon. Ca.irorNnia: San Diego, 1875, Cleveland; 
Fort Mojave, Cooper; Jacumba, Abrams, 3662; Mountain Springs, 
Mary F. Spencer, 763 (vypE, Gray Herb.). Mexico: Guaymas, 
Palmer, 248; Sonora, Thurber, 965. 
/ Draba Paysonii, nom. nov. D. vestita Payson, Am. Journ. Bot. 
iv. 261 (1917), not D. vestita Davidson, Bull. So. Calif. Acad. Sel. 
xv. 17 (1916). 
Rydberg, Fl. Ry. Mts. & Adj. Plains, 353 (1917), refers this 
plant, with D. Mulfordae Payson, to D. densifolia Nutt. remarking 
that D. Mulfordae is the “ typical form with elongate inflorescence 
and coarse pubescence ”’; D. vestita the ‘ more common form with 
corymbose inflorescence and softer pubescence.” I am inclined 
to agree with the first statement but not with the second. There 
is, in the Gray Herbarium, a specimen which I cannot distinguish — 
from co-type material of D. Mulfordae and which is labeled in 
Durand’s hand “ D. densifolia Nutt. Rocky Mts. Nuttall.” The 
plant agrees exactly with the original description of D. densifolia. 
If then this is the plant to which Nuttall assigned his name, aS_ 
seems highly probable, the name D. Mulfordae passes into syD- 
onymy. D. Paysonii, however, is a different plant, closely related 
it is true, as, indeed, the species in this group all are, but constantly 
distinct from D. densifolia. The pubescence of the latter 1s mostly 
simple, the few branched hairs forking only once or twice and evi- 
dently hispid in character. The pubescence of D. Paysonz on the 
other hand, while largely composed of single hairs, is soft, the hairs 
becoming tangled and appearing as though much branched of 
even stellate. The petals of D. densifolia are 5 mm. long or even 
longer; those of D. Paysonii about 4 mm. long. But the best 
distinction between these species lies in the difference in the styles, 
