478 
LYCHNIS fulgens. 
> Siberian Lychnis. 
: fi DECANDRIA PENTAGYNIA. 
* Nat. ord. CARYOPHYLLER. Jussieu gen. 299. Div. V. Calyx tubu- 
Josus. Stamina 10 (alterna hypogyna, alterna sepits epipetala). Styli duo 
aut tres aut quinque. 
LYCHNIS. Cal. tubulosus 5-dentatus. Petala 5 unguiculata, limbo 
sepe fissa, Styli 5. Caps. 3-locularis 5-valvis. Flores sepe_corymbost 
terminales, rarids spicato-panieulati, in LycHNITE alpina et LYCHNITE 
quadridentata interdum 4-styli, in LyCHNITE dioicd aborti divici. Fructus 
in L. viscaria 5-locularis, in L. Flore Cuculi wnilocularis. Juss. loc. cit. 302. 
L. fulgens, hirsuta, floribus solitariis, foliis oblongis. Sprengel cent, sp. pl. 
minus cogn. 26. n. 55. 
Lychnis fulgens.’ Fischer ined. (fide Sprengelit). Curtis's magaz. 2104. 
Herba hirtins tomentosa; caulis subsesquipedalis erectus ramosissimus, 
ramis supernis floriferis trichotomo-cymosis, floribus brevissime pedunculatis, 
medio singularum trichotomiarum ebracteato, lateralibus bibracteatis, bracteis 
calycem subequantibus. Fol. opposita, decussato-distantia, sessilia, oblongo- 
ovata, acuminata. Cal. oblongus, lanatus, lindraceus, 10-anguloso-pli- 
catus, intis glaber, dentibus 5 acuminatis. Cor. aurantiaco-coccinea, dia- 
metro sesquiunciali vel majori, limbo stellato-explanato; petala dorso cari- 
nata, lamind cuneato-obcordaté 4-fidé, lobis inequalissimis, mediis 2 mul- 
totics majoribus distantibus lineari-oblongis obtusissimis apice denticulato- 
erosis, lateralibus duplo brevioribus, angustissimis, lineart-subulatis; ungue 
aquante calycem, intis margine lanato-ciliato, parum breviore laminé. 
Corona pede limbi posita, é paribus 5 squamularum dentiformium recumben- 
‘tium igneo-rutilantium. Stam. tubo subinserta, alternd 5 tardiora, 5 petalis 
inserta, 5 stipite germinis: anth. incumbentes, coccinea. Styli 5 simplicis- 
simi, inclusi. Germ. viride, glabrum, oblongum columella brevi innitens. 
It is not an easy matter to point out in what ‘respects 
this new and brilliant acquisition is to be discriminated from 
the well-known “ Scarlet Lychnis” (Lu. chalcedonica), if we 
except the differences of dimension. In fulgens the leaves” 
are broader and proportionately shorter, the stem is scarcely 
one third the height of that of chalcedonica; in fulgens the 
flowers are several times larger, and the two outer segments 
of the petals longer and more perfectly defined than in chal- 
cedonica, where they are mere teethlike rudiments; in ful-_ 
gens the branches which support the flowers are greatly more 
extended, and farther apart, thus giving an incomparably 
wider breadth to the inflorescence than in chalcedonica, 
where the flowers are nearly sessile, and very compactly 
