212 T. Holm, — Studies in the Cyperaceoe. 



be arranged with some of the higher developed "greges," and 

 the extreme forms of 0. exilis, those which possess several 

 lateral spikes at the base of the terminal, suggest some affinity 

 with C. echinata Mnrr., as already observed by Tuckermann 

 and Boott. In 0. echinata and its allies the direction of 

 utriculus undergoes the same change as we have described as 

 characteristic of the Dioicm, and, moreover, the structure 

 itself of this little organ (utriculus) shows several analogies, 

 which seem to indicate some affinity to exist between these 

 species. We are, thus, more inclined to arrange the Dioicce of 

 Tuckermann (excluding C. eapitata) under Vignea rather than 

 under Cariees genidnce, and the reason is not so much because 

 they are distigmatic, but on account of the structure of utricu- 

 lus, which suggests affinities with Vignea, but not with the 

 other Cariees. 



In regard to C. echinata Murr. a number of very diverse 

 species (C. loliacea, O. canescens, etc.) have been considered as 

 its nearest allies by writers of different periods, who have 

 treated the genus. Nevertheless C. sterilis Willd."* is, beyond 



* Having studied what Professor L. H. Bailey supposes to be "types" of 

 various species of Carex, this author arrived at the conclusion that G echinata 

 Murr. from the Pacific slope appears to be the same as the European plant, but 

 that the type does not occur in the Eastern United States. At that time (L889) 

 Professor Bailey accepted G. echinata as an American species with some varieties, 

 among which the var. microstachys Bceckl was considered ideutical with G. 

 sterilis Willd. and C. scirpoides Schk. oq the strength of some specimens, pre- 

 served in the herbaria of Willdenow and Schkuhr. A few years later (1893) 

 Prof. Bailey made still another disposition of the same species by eliminating 

 G. echinata altogether from the North American flora, stating that Francis Boott 

 many years ago '' questioned if the Americau plant is the same as the European 

 G. echinata." 1 We are not aware that Boott made this statement in regard to this 

 species in North America, but only so far as concerns specimens from "South of 

 the British provinces" (111. genus Carex, vol. i, 56, 1858), which lie could not 

 satisfactorily refer to the European plant. While thus excluding G. echinata 

 from this continent, Prof. Bailey adopts G. sterilis Willd. as a species and identi- 

 cal with C. scirpoides Schk, of which he claims to have seen the originals. 

 Whether these specimens were the "original" or not, it must be borne in mind 

 that the old botanists did not work with types, and in most cases, it is nothing 

 but a mere guess whether this or that herbarium-sheet contains the specimen, or 

 part of it, from which the original diagnosis was drawn. And it appears to us 

 that this modern investigation of old specimens supposed to be types, arises from 

 inability to faithfully comprehend the descriptions. If, for instance, the old speci- 

 mens preserved of C. sterilis and G. scirpoides were "the types," and. moreover, 

 identically the same species." one would necessarily expect to find the diagnoses 

 equally uniform; but this is not the case, at least not as these species were 

 understood by Willdenow. Let us, therefore, compare the most salient points in 

 the diagnoses of these three species, G. sterilis, G. scirpoides and G. echinata as 

 described by Willdenow with the one by Prof. Bailey, who has adopted G. 

 sterilis as identical with G. scirpoides, and formerly even with C. echinata. 



Willdenow. Inflorescence. Utriculus. Squamae. 



G. sterilis. Spicis dioicis sub- fruct. ovatis com- ovataa acutae 



senis alternis ob- presso-triquetris- capsulas sub- 



longiscontiguis. acuminatis, apice asquantes. 



recurvis bicuspi- 

 datis. 



