359 
Meconopsis and Cathcartia . 
23 . Meconopsis robusta, Hook. f. & Thoms. Folia radicalia pinnati- 
partita caulina pinnatifida glaucescentia pilis barbellatis sparse strigosa ; 
sepala laxe strigosa ; flores lutei in cymas racemiformes paniculatasve 
dispositi ; capsula valvis 8-n laxe patenter setosa ; stylus brevis basi 
manifeste incrassatus. Hook. f. & Thoms., FI. Ind., 253 (1855); Walp., 
Ann., iv. 171 (1857); Prain, Journ. As. Soc. Beng., Ixiv. 2. 315 ( 1 857) ; 
Strachey, PI. Kumaon, 10 (1906). M. nipalensis , Hook, f., Bot. Mag., 
t. 5585 (j 866), nec M. napaidensis , DC. M. robusta , Hook. f. & Thoms., 
FI. Brit. Ind., i. 118 (1872), pro parte maxima sed exemplum nepalense 
prolatum excludend. M. paniculata , Flora and Sylva, iii. 84 (1905) nec 
Prain. Argemone mexicana , Wall, in Cat. Lith., 8126 E (1830) nec Linn. 
Himalaya occidentalis. Garhwal et Kumaon; in pratis alpinis, 
8-1 2, coo p. s. m. 
M. robusta is nearly allied to M. paniculata and is the representative of that 
species in the western Himalaya. It is readily distinguished from M. paniculata 
and M. superba by its more deeply lobed leaves and by the absence of stellate 
pubescence ; with both it agrees as regards the shape of the capsule and style. As 
regards foliage, though not as regards indumentum, it agrees with M. napaulensis 
and M. Wallichii , rather than with M . paniculata ; from these two, however, it differs 
markedly in respect to the shape of the capsule and style. 
Occasionally to be met with in European collections, this appears to be as 
a rule confused with M. paniculata. The latest instance of this confusion (Flora 
and Sylva, iii. 84) corrects itself. The remark that the foliage of the plant referred 
to is ‘ much cut ’ shows that the author cannot have had the true M. paniculata in 
view. Besides, in the article referred to, the true M. paniculata is already accounted 
for under the erroneous name M. nepalensis. Apparently always monocarpic. 
24 . Meconopsis napaulensis, DC. Folia radicalia pinnatipartita 
caulina pinnatifida laxe pilis barbellatis simulac dense indumento stellato 
induta ; sepala laxe strigosa et dense stellato-tomentosa; flores fusco- 
purpurei in cymas paniculatas dispositi ; capsula valvis 5-7 patenter vel 
subreflexe setosa ; stylus elongatus subcylindricus. DC. Prodr., i. 121 
(1824); Prain, Journ. As. Soc. Beng., Ixiv. 2. 317 (1895). M. robusta , 
Hook. f. & Thoms., FI. Brit. Ind., i. 118 (1872) pro parte minima et quoad 
exemplum nepalense (Wall. Cat., 8121) prolatum, nec M. robusta , Hook. f. 
& Thoms, in FI. Ind. M. Wallichii , var. rubrofusca , Hook, f., Bot. 
Mag., t. 6760 (1884). Stylophorum nepalense , Spreng., Syst., iv., cur. post. 
203 (1827) ; Steud., Nomencl., ed. 2, ii. 650 (1841) parti m. A. paniculatum , 
G. Don, Gen. Syst., i. 135 (1831), partim et quoad exempla floribus rubris 
prolata. 
Himalaya centralis orientalisque. Nepal et Sikkim occidentalis ; 
in pratis alpinis, 10-12,000 p. s. m. 
This species resembles M. robusta in foliage, and specimens corresponding 
to the original type were in 1872 referred by Hooker and Thomson to that species, 
