tion of the names of the parent species I should think it most 

 natural to keep the name of /. fluitans for the Neckar-plant. 

 If, however, you will give the bastard an independent name, I 

 should at least propose that the bastard gets a quite new name 

 and not the name of P. fluitans. 



Bennet who has also inquired into that question thinks that 

 the name of P. fluitans ought to be kept for the barren form viz. 

 the bastard, while for the Neckar-plant he uses the name of P. 

 americanus Ghamisso, because he agrees with Morong 1 ) who 

 considers the Neckar-plant to belong to the same species as P. 

 Lonchites Tuckerm., which is again the same as P. americanus 

 Cham. Bennets arguments, however, for keeping the name of P. 

 fluitans for the barren form are untenable; Bennet writes (1. c. 

 pag. 296): „We have no certain knowledge of any specimen of 

 Both's species preserved in any herbarium; but there are at Munich 

 specimens in Schreber's herbarium named as such and gathered 

 „In Seebach, 1775", and others „In Seebach, 1782". It seems to 

 me a reasonable inference that these specimens are from (or seen 

 by) Roth ; the more so, because there are other species in the 

 same collection actually received from Roth, and signed by him. 

 They are the plant we call fluitans in England (hybrid?) and not 

 the Neckar-plant of Schimper and Dr. Tiselius." 



To this is only to say, that because a herbarium contains plants 

 actually from Roth it can not be necessary that other plants in the 

 same herbarium should be from him. The specimens from the 

 Munich herbarium mentioned have been examined by me and 

 that they belong to the barren form of P. fluitans is true enough 

 but they can not in the least be considered original specimens. 



As to a specimen in the Bremen herbarium the chance of 

 its being an original specimen is better. Buchenau in the above 

 mentioned observations says when speaking of P. fluitans Roth: 



„ nach Beobachtungen in der freien Natur und nach Verglei- 



chung eines (sterilen) Rotirschen Originalexemplares " It is 



most likely that the specimen by Buchenau called an original 

 specimen is that from the Bremen herbarium named P. fluitans 

 Roth and on whose label in 1867 is added: „Aus dem Roth'schen 

 Herbarium (ohne Angabe des Standortes u. Sammlers)". If we take 



] ) Morong, Th., The Najadaceae of North America. Mem. of the Torr. bot. 

 Club. Vol. III, Nr. % 1893. Page 21. 



