ROBINSON. —- JAEGERIA AND RUSSELIA. 317 
+ Heads relatively large, including the well-exserted conspicuous yellow rays, 1.2 
5 cm. broad. 
++ Main stem prostrate, rooting at the nodes; branches ascending, few-headed: 
racts foliar. 
3. J. MACROCEPHALA, Less. Syn. Gen. Comp. 223, & Linnaea, ix. 
270. — Jalapa, Mexico, Schiede & Deppe, C. L. Smith, nos. 1624, 1835 ; 
brook-sides near Patzcuaro, Michoacan, Pringle, no. 4166. 
++ ++ Main stem erect from a short decumbent base: heads many : bracts reduced. 
4. J. pepuncunata, Hook. & Arn. Bot. Beech. 299. — Jalisco, 
Beechey, Palmer, no. 427, ace. to Gray, Proc. Am. Acad. xxii. 424 ; Prin- 
gle, no. 1772; also Palmer, no. 47 in part (Spilanthes sessilis, Gray, 1. ¢. 
428, not Hemsl.). The identity of Mr. Pringle’s no. 1772 with the type 
specimen at Kew has been kindly verified by Mr. W. B. Hemsley. 
+ + Heads considerably regis rays inconspicuous, scarcely exserted, yellow or 
white: pubescent or hirsute annuals. 
“+ Dwarf but not creeping, very slender; pubescence scanty: leaves small, ovate, 
at all clasping at the base 
5. J. mntoipes, HBK. Nov. Gen. & Spec. iv. 278, t. 400. The only 
plant in herb. Gray corresponding at all satisfactorily to the plate and 
description of this Michoacan species is some rather poor material col- 
lected in Costa Rica by Oersted. In it the stems are very slender, simple 
or sub-simple, and erect, while the leaves are small and truly ovate, sub- 
sessile, but in no sense clasping.* Kunth describes the rays as yellow. 
It is not. unlikely that this original species of the genus was only a 
starved condition of the common J/. hirta, Less. 
++ ++ Tall, inclining to be repent at the base: leaves ovate, acutish: peduncles 
filiform, several times as long as the heads: pubescence usually copious and 
spreading. 
6. J. umera, Less. Syn. Gen. Comp. 223. J. repens, DC. Prodr. v 
544. Acmella hirta, Lag. Nov. Gen. & Spec. 31; Less. Linnaea, v. 153. 
Melampodium brachyglossum, J. D. Smith, Bot. ‘Gi xiii. 74. Spilan- 
thes sessilifolia, Coulter in J. Donnell Smith, Enum. P]. Guat. i, 23, iii. 
Jaegeria calva, Wats., a binomial needlessly published by Rusby, 
Mem. Torr. Club, iii. no. 3, 62.* 
* Dr. Watson was quite right in regarding this plant as the aorasni see cal- 
nous part of Schultz’s mixed type of the unpublished Galinsoga calva, as the exam- 
the Kew Herbarium for comparison) clearly shows. Sag 
another Galinsoga calva, founded on a pappus-bearing plant (which in the well 
known confusion of the Mandon numbers may or may not have had any relation to 
