natural Family of Plants called Composites. 111 
cosus vimineus, foliis oblongo-ovatis oppositis,floribus comosis” of 
Browne* ; while Linneus has quoted and even derived his spe¬ 
cific name from the same author's “ Amelias ramosus, foliis remotis 
terminalibus,fulcris longis divaricatis-f*;" which, instead of belong¬ 
ing to Biclens scandens , I believe, for the following reasons, to be 
Bidens nivea. 1 st, The figure in Burmann’s Thesaurus Zeylani- 
cus£, quoted by Browne for his plant, though belonging to Lavenia 
erecta , is at the same time a good representation of Bidens nivea , 
and very unlike Bidens scandens. 2 dly, Browne's description in 
most respects very well agrees with the former species, but cer¬ 
tainly not with Bidens scandens. And 3dly, I infer that Bidens 
nivea was actually in Browne’s Herbarium, from finding it in 
the Flora Jamaicensis published in the oth volume of Amoenitates 
Academicae, and formed chiefly from that Herbarium; though a 
very erroneous reference for this species is there made to Browme's 
first Santolina, which, from the description, cannot possibly be¬ 
long to Bidens nivea, but is probably Verbesina gigantea. 
M. Decandolle has lately established a new genus, Salmea, con¬ 
sisting of Bidens scandens , Bidens hirsuta , and a third species 
which I have not examined. These plants are very properly se¬ 
parated from Bidens by this excellent botanist, and well distin¬ 
guished both from that genus and from Melananihera. It is 
rather remarkable, however, that he has not thought it necessary 
to compare Salmea with Spilanthus, from which, according to his 
description, it differs only in its imbricate involucrum. But 
as in Spilanthus the foliola of the involucrum are not exactly 
equal, and are disposed at least in a double series, I have in- 
* Browne, Jam. 317. t be. 
J Eupatoriophalacrum scrophulariae aquatics foliis oppositis. Burnt. Thesaur. Zeyi. 
p. 95, t. 42. 
troduced 
