206 T. Holm — Studies in the Cyperacece. 



with the same distinction " spica unica " and " spiculse 

 plures"; further, he proposed " Vigneastra" " Leptantherce" 

 and " Legitimes" the last mentioned being identical with 

 Carices genuince. This author, however, seems to have detected 

 some affinity to exist between certain Psyllophorce (Dioicce) 

 and VignecB (Stellidatce), since he makes the following state- 

 ment about the former (Dioicce), " Stellulatas referentes." In 

 a lately published paper upon South American Oar ices Rev. 

 G. Kiikenthal accepts Vignea, Vigneastra and Eucarex 

 (Carices genuince), and he recognizes five sections among the 

 Vignece : Muricatce Fr., Pemotce Aschers, Canescentes Fr., 

 Alatm Kiikenth. and Capituligerce Kiikenth. While this 

 author refers certain Psyllophorce (Nardince Fr.) to Vignea, 

 he does not suggest these to represent lesser developed types 

 of any of the other sections, and the reason may be, that the 

 South American Capitidigerce : C. trichodes Steud., C. capi- 

 tata L. and C. caduca Boott, constitute a small and isolated 

 group of species with no immediate relatives among the higher 

 developed Vignece of that region, the extratropical South 

 America. 



The systematic position of a number of monostachyous 

 species of Carex thus remains to be decided upon, and it seems 

 as if Tuckermann were the first author who felt warranted in 

 referring some of these to Vignece, the Dioicce to the Stellu- 

 latce, while both Drejer and Kiikenthal considered- several of 

 these as "formee hebetatce of Carices genuince." It may be that 

 the original type of Carex was dioecious and that it resembled 

 our monostachyous species, and that both Vignece and Carices 

 genuince developed from such monostachyous forms as two 

 parallel branches, a theory that has been discussed so excel- 

 lently by a German author, August Schulz, in a paper upon the 

 morphology of Carices. There would in this way hardly be 

 any reason to object to the disposition of some of the mono- 

 stachyous species among Vignece as " formse hebetatse :" lesser 

 developed types of which habit and structure might point 

 towards the earliest fundamental forms of the genus. 



In looking over the Psyllophorce as this section is under- 

 stood by Tuckermann, it is evident that several of these species 

 have no other character in common than that taken from the 

 structure of the inflorescence, being an almost simple spike, 

 androgynous or sometimes dioecious. The purely staminate 

 inflorescence and the staminate portion of the androgynous 

 invariably represent true spikes, while the pistillate, as we 

 have described in previously published papers, are always 

 decompound, though less so in these species than in others, 

 where several pistillate spikelets may be united so as to form 

 spicate, more or less ramified inflorescences. In the Psyllo- 



