PANICUM NEURANTITUNI Grisebach, Cat. Pl. Cub. 232. 1866.
There is no doubt as to the occurrence of this species in the United States, its range extending, so far as the specimens to which I have had access indicate, from southeastern Virginia, thus bringing it into the region covered by the Illustrated Flora, to Florida, and westward to Louisiana.
Grisebach based his species on Wright's Cuban Collection no. 3453. This exactly matches the plant collected by A. H. Curtiss, in Duval Co., Florida, no. 3567*, and also my no. 1243, secured at Eustis, in the same State, during July, 1894.
I would refer to this species, in addition to those already cited above, the following : N. L. Britton, Virginia Beach, Va., Sept. 1o, 1895.
Ravenal, Aiken, S. C., May 28,1867.
J. K. Small, near Valdosta, Lowndes Co., Ga., June 6-12, 1895. J. H. Simpson, Sanibel Island, Fla., March, 1891, no. 298. Chapman, Appalachicola, Fla.
S. M. Tracy, Ocean Springs, Miss., Aug. 3, 1889, no. 421. C. L. Pollard, I3iloxi, Miss., July 1, 1895, no. 1417. Drummond, New Orleans, 1832.
Curtiss' plant, and also my own, both cited above, well repre sent the late and much branched state, while Simpson's no. 298,
and the plant collected by Ravenal, both also alluded to above, present the state of the plant in its early and simple condition.
This is closely related to P. angustifolium Ell., a specimen of which, so named by Elliott, is in the herbarium of Columbia Uni versity. The smaller obtuse spikelets which are broader in pro portion to their length and the branches of the primary panicle re maining contracted for some time readily separate it from the P. angustifolatm Ell., in which the spikelets are acute and con siderably larger, and the primary panicle branches not remaining contracted, but spreading at once.
As this grass is apparently quite common, there may be an older name than the above, but up to the present search has failed to reveal it. When a proper disposition is made of the species of Elliott and Michaux, and some of the other early southern botanists, some name among them may be found to apply to this plant. There can be no doubt, however, as to this grass being the P. of Grisebach, for, as stated above, it exactly matches the form upon which he based the species.