262 PROCEEDINGS: BOSTON SOCIETY NATURAL HISTORY. 
of the more western species of the same genus, and the notes pre¬ 
pared on these may be presented as follows:— 
Polygonum camporum, Meisner. This species, published in 
Martius’s Flora Brasiliensis, v, pt. 1, 21 (1855), was characterized 
thus: “caulibus elongatis ramisque filiformibus subsim’plicibus, acute 
sulcatis, ad apicem usque foliosis; ochreis internodio multo breviori- 
bus, hyalinis, basi fuscis, circa 6-nervis, demum laceris deciduis; foliis 
sessilibus, anguste lanceolatis linearibusve; floribus axillaribus sub- 
solitariis; spicam longam interruptam foliosam formantibus; pedi- 
cellis demum ochream calicemque aequantibus; nucula inclusa, 
nitida, faciebus late ovatis minutissime punctatis (baud striatis) 
“a boreale nob. foliis omnibus planis, margine leviter recurvo, 
inferioribus venosis.” 
“Habitat in Texas: Drummond Coll. 7, n. 27I, II. n. 25 j ; 
circa Dejar , Derlandier n. 17701 
“ /3 australe nob. foliis inferioribus . .. . , superioribus subulato- 
linearibus, margine revolutis, supra sulcato-lineatis, subtus 1-nerviis.” 
“ Habitat circa Duenos Ayres : Twee due / verisimiliter etiam in 
Drasilia australi 
On examining in the Gray herbarium Drummond’s no. 254 of 
his second 1 exan collection and Berlandier’s no. 1770 from Bejar, 
I find that they represent two quite different and as I believe dis¬ 
tinct plants. In Berlandier’s specimen the spikes are bracteate 
throughout their length, the bracts being from 2 to 9 mm. in length 
and considerably longer than the subtended flowers. The leaves 
and bracts in a dried state are smoothish or only obscurely rugulose 
on the upper surface. In Drummond’s plant no. 254, however, the 
inflorescence consists of about 6 essentially naked spikes racemosely 
or subumbellately clustered at the end of the stem or branch. The 
bracts are very inconspicuous and are much exceeded by the flowers. 
The leaves and bracts, moreover, are very definitely striate-nervate 
on the upper surface. On reading Meisner’s description with these 
points in mind, I think there can be no doubt that the expression 
u floribus sessilibus subsolitariis spicam longam interruptam form¬ 
antibus ” applies to the plant of Berlandier and not to Drummond’s 
♦ 
no. 254. Unfortunately Drummond’s no. 274 is not at hand and it 
is impossible to say to which form it belongs. However, it is clear 
that the species as cited by the original author includes two quite 
different plants, and it is certainly best to take as typical the one to 
