THE AMERICAN BOTANIST 



23 



[It appears that Dr. Peck and the editor of this magazine 

 are not the only ones who have been attracted by the variations 

 of color in Rudheckia Iiirta. As a matter of fact, such varia- 

 tions appear to be fairly common if one may judge from the 

 number of people reporting them. So far as we can discover, 

 the first mention of the forms in print was in Meehans' 

 Monthly for 1891 where several notes mention the two-colored 

 form as if it were a newly discovered variation. In 1893 Miss 

 Florence Beckwith published in the ''Proceedings of the 

 Rochester Academy of Science" a note on the occurrence of 

 several varieties near Rochester, New York, accompanied by 

 a plate showing no less than seven dififerent forms. All these, 

 it may be of interest to note, can be matched by forms growing 

 in the editor's garden. Miss Beckwith later listed the bicolored 

 form in her 'Tlora of Monroe County, N. Y." but without 

 name. The form has not escaped an earlier name, however, 

 for in the "Sixth Annual Report of the Michigan Academy of 

 Science/' published in 1904, Mr. O. A. Farwell described and 

 named the plant as follows: ''Rudheckia hirta L. var. piil- 

 chcrriuia. A form that dif¥ers from the species in having* a 

 part of the upper surface of the ray, or even the whole face, 

 brown purple." In letters recently received, Mr. Farwell states 

 that w^hile his variety is based on the two forms recently 

 described as hicolor and rubra, both forms being mounted on 

 the same type sheet, he has always considered the two-colored 

 form to be typical of the name pulcherrinia. Since it is appar- 

 ent that both forms are distinct enough to deserve' being sep- 

 arately named, it may be well to apply the name pulclicrriiua to 

 the form previously known as hicolor leaving ruhra to stand for 

 the brownish-red form. It may be noted, however, that both 

 Mr. Farwell and the editor have described these plants as 

 varieties. Should some enterprising name tinker wish to re- 

 duce them to forms, then by the absurd rules that go^'ern such 

 cases in botanical nomenclature, new names may be given the 

 plants and both rubra, hicolor and pulchcrriuia be relegated to 

 synonomy. — Ed.] 



