seems that no further notice was given to the plant till Presl, in 
vol. 2 of the Reliquiae Haenkeanae (1831) published it under the 
name of Zauschneria, in honor of Dr. Zauschner, a Professor of 
Natural History in the University of Prague, naming two species, 
Z. Californica and Z. Mexicana, the second somewhat doubtfully. 
Hooker, in the Botanical Magazine for February, 1850, (t. 4493) 
described and figured a new variety, latifolia, from a cultivated 
plant. In the Genera Plantarum, vol. L, pt. 3, (1867?), Bentham 
and Hooker give a somewhat more comprehensive generic diag- 
nosis than the original of Presl. In his Natural History of Plants, 
vol. 6, (1880), Baillon gives a similar diagnosis. In the Botany 
of California, vol. I., (1880), the genus is briefly described and 
one species, Z. Californica Presl, and a variety, microphylla Gray, 
are given, together with their distribution as then worked out. In 
1887 Prof. E. L. Greene published a paper on "The Species of 
Zauschneria" (Pittonia i:23-28), in which he called attention to 
the many forms found in herbaria and proposed five species, four 
of them new. In his 'Contributions to Western Botany," No. 4, 
(1893), M. E. Jones criticises to some extent Prof. Greene's posi- 
tion as to the basis of specific distinction and cites some of his 
own collections in support of his views. With the exception of 
Torrey and Gray's Flora of North America, which I have not 
seen, these are all the references, except in distributional lists, 
that I have been able to locate in the literature of last century. 
In 1902 Dr. A. Davidson described a new species, Z. Arizonica, 
from material collected near Metcalfe, Ariz. In 1905 Aven Nel- 
son described Z. argentea from Nei^ada, and in 1907 he described 
Z. Garretti from Utah. In 1916 the writer described two species, 
Z. glandulcsa and Z. viscosa, from material collected in the south- 
ern California mountains. In 1917 Dr. P. A. Rydberg described 
Z. crassifolia from Arizona and southern Utah. In addition to 
these alreadv published species I find in Miss Eastwood's MSS. 
notes some that she described from material in Gray Herbarium 
that I consider worthy of recognition. There are two or three 
forms which she has described of which I have seen no material 
of the collections cited nor any that I could satisfactorily deter- 
mine as belonging to those forms, and these I omit. I have also 
found it necessary to describe some forms that would not fit any 
of the species I have found already described. It has not, how- 
ever, been the purpose of this study to unduly multiply described 
forms and, for this reason, I have the rather broadened the speci- 
fic limits than narrowed them. 
It might not be amiss to note that, as Dr. Greene pointed out 
(1. c), Presl's plate and description are faulty in that the lobes 
of the calyx are represented as being reflexed, whereas they are 
never reflexed but always closly appressed to the petals. Dr. 
Greene further notes that, in: some species, the upper pair of 
14 
