Document information

Physical location:

92.12.05b

Plant names

Preferred Citation:

Ferdinand von Mueller to Edward Greene, 1892-12-05 [92.12.05b]. R.W. Home, Thomas A. Darragh, A.M. Lucas, Sara Maroske, D.M. Sinkora, J.H. Voigt and Monika Wells (eds), Correspondence of Ferdinand von Mueller, <https://vmcp.rbg.vic.gov.au/id//letters/1890-6/1892/92-12-05b-final.odt>, accessed June 13, 2026

1
Letter not found. The text given here is from 'On
Jussiaea repens

Search for Jussiaea repens in

of Linnaeus', Erythea, vol. 1, p. 61 (B93.03.06).
Will you be so kind, dear Professor Greene, as to publish, in some one of the botanical periodicals of your country, the fact that the Jusssiaea repens of American phytographers is not the Linnaean plant that was so named; for that has the petals white, except their base (just as in
Ranunculus aquatilis

Search for Ranunculus aquatilis in

) as was stated long ago by Rheede and by Ray, in their definitions of what afterward became the type of Linnaeus' species.
The genuine J. repens is known with certainty only from continental India, where the smaller species, with petals always entirely yellow, does not exist; but which, however, must approach very near to the Indian confines. This is the J. diffusa of Forskaal; and, as Mr. Oliver has shown, it is also the African plant,
2
Oliver (1868-77), vol. 2, p. 488.
and the same occurs throughout Australia. I believe it is also the American plant. Mr. Mohr, of Alabama, who, at my suggestion made through Mr. Thomas Meehan, investigated the case, reports that in the Southern United States the plant called J. repens has always quite yellow petals.
As the subject is one of some interest from the point of geographical distribution, will you kindly make known at an early date your own experience in connection with the American Jussiaea, and address a note on the subject, to Professor Leveillè.
Regardfully yours,
Ferd. von Mueller.
Melbourne, Australia, 5 Dec, 1892.
3
Greene comments on the letter (p. 62) that 'I had from him nearly two years ago, an intimation that our American Jussicaea was not J. repens ; and in Flora Franciscana (page 227), I acceded to his proposition that we have in North America only the J. diffusa '. However, Greene also pointed out that he had treated Jussiaea as indistinguishable from Ludwigia , under which name he reported the analysis; see Greene (1891-97), part 1, p. 227, issued 1891.