318 PROCEEDINGS OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY, 
This is evidently the commonest and most widely distributed species of 
the genus extending from western Mexico to Tropical Brazil. It is 
highly variable in stature, foliage, and degree of pubescence; yet floral 
or even vegetative characters fora satisfactory segregation appear to be 
lacking. Var. GLaBra, Baker, in Mart. Fl. Bras. vi. pt. 3, 167, is, to 
judge from its first mentioned type (Mandon’s no. 80), merely a smoother 
not an altogether glabrous form as its description would imply. 
++ ++ ++ Dwarf, not bea freely branched, smoothish: leaves, at least the 
upper ones, obovate or oblong, sessile by a narrowed but still somewhat 
clasping base: peduncles au or none. 
7. J. piscomera, Klatt, Arbeit. des Hamb. Botan. Mus. 1893, p. 2 
of reprint. Heads small (not discoid even in Klatt’s type specimen !), 
short-peduncled or sessile: rays small although slightly exserted, white 
or pale yellow. — Pringle, no. 4279 from the Sierra de las Cruces, State 
of Mexico (type), also Pringle, no. 7349, Bourgeau, no. 1282, and 
Schaffner, no. 286, all collected in or near the Valley of Mexico. Per- 
haps too near J. hirta. Klatt’s ill-chosen name must be retained with 
regret. 
++ ++ ++ ++ Low, creeping: leaves rounded at the base: Galapagos Islands. 
8. J. proreprns, Hook. f. Trans. Linn. Soc. xx. 214. — James 
Island, Darwin. 
eee 
Schultz’s type) appears to me a mistaken fidelity to an indefinite and inappropriate 
specific name, especially when Dr. Rusby explains so carefully that he himself and 
not Schultz should stand as authority for the pappus-bearing G. calva. Jaegeria 
calva, as applied by Dr. Watson, was merely an herbarium name, resting upon 4 
obvious clerical error. Far from being “astonishing,” slips of this sort appear to 
be tolerably frequent in manuscript work of even the most careful botanists. The 
thoughtless publication of such mistaken names, however, merely adds to the mass 
of an already burdensome synonymy. It may be worth while to note in passing 
that Dr. Rusby’s name G. calva is not only inappropriate and misleading, but that 
¥ 
admits) by Baker in the Fl. Bras. vi. pt. 3, 167 (1884) in the synonymy of Jaegeria 
hirta, var. glabra. Its status is thereby established, and it is impossible to deny its 
publication, since it has been used in print together with a description, defining 
synonymy, and the citation of Mandon’s no. 80, one of the types originally mem 
tioned by Schultz. But as thus defined it was applied to a — Whether we 
write Galinsoga calva, Sch. Bip., or G. calva, Baker, in our synonymy of Taegeria 
hirta, the combination Galinsoga calva has been a published ae since 1884, 
and Dr. Rusby’s G. calva, applied to a different plant, is thus a later homonym 
i i to 
-hoped that if any one feels impelled, on account of the “ doctrine of homony ms,” 
to assign a new name to Dr. Rusby’s species, the choice may be more felicitous. 
