RYDBERG: NOTES ON ROSACEAE 53 
It is therefore plain that R. virginiana Mill. is the oldest name 
for the rose usually known as'R. lucida Ehrh. To me it seems that 
R. carolinensis Marsh. applies better to this species than does 
either of the two species described by Linnaeus under the name 
of R. carolina. R. rapa Bosc is apparently a double form of this 
species, | 
Mr. Best reduced this species to a variety of R. humilis. He 
had collected a great number of rose-specimens in New Jersey. 
Some of these were presented to Columbia University. These 
show many gradations between R. lucida Ehrh. and R. humilis 
Marsh. (i.e., the original R. carolina L.), and also between these 
and another form, R. humilis villosa Best (R. Lyoni Pursh). 
Best concluded that all should be regarded as a single variable 
species. He has been followed by N. L. Britton and C. K. 
Schneider, the latter using the name R. virginiana lucida Best. 
I doubt if Best ever used said combination, at least in print. 
In my opinion several of Mr. Best’s specimens are of hybrid 
origin, and this circumstance would give a satisfactory explanation 
for the intergradation, which is rarely met with elsewhere. 
Rosa blanda Willmottiana Baker, according to the figure, has 
nothing to do with R. blanda, but belongs without doubt to R. 
virginiana. 
15. Rosa Lyonr Pursh 
A species which has been confused with both R. virginiana 
Mill. (R. lucida Ehrh.) and R. carolina L. (R. humilis Marsh.), 
but which differs from both in having the leaves densely pubescent 
beneath. In general habit and in the sepals and the prickles, 
it resembles most the latter, but the leaflets are much broader and 
the flowers are as large asin R. virginiana. The flowers are also 
more inclined to be corymbose than in R. carolina. R. Lyoniis a 
more western species, receiving its best development in Missouri, 
but extends as far east as central New York and New Jersey, where 
it mixes with the two species mentioned, and hybridizes with 
them. See remarks under R. virginiana. R. Lyoni is apparently 
the same as R. pusilla Raf., R. lucida a T. & G., and R. humilis 
villosa Best. 
