216 Rhodora * [NOVEMBER 
are erect or more or less spreading and the portion of the perianth 
below them is cylindrical or slightly flaring in the upper part. As the 
capsule approaches maturity the calyptra grows out beyond the 
perianth. In Ch. ascendens the perianth is large and only slightly 
trifid, although the margins are much the same as in typical Ch. 
pallescens. The lobes themselves sometimes spread widely and some- 
times bend inwards until almost in contact. The portion of the 
perianth below the lobes is strongly inflated but sometimes presents 
the appearance of being contracted in the upper part. Even at 
maturity the perianth exceeds the calyptra in length. Between these 
two extremes, however, are numerous intermediate conditions. 
Some of these are noted by Schiffner, who states that he does not 
attach very great importance to differences in the size or form of the 
perianth or in the relative lengths of perianth and calyptra. Under 
Ch. lophocoleoides, for example, which he considers a variety of Ch. 
pallescens, he calls attention to plants from Tirol and Salzburg in 
which the perianth agrees essentially with that of Ch. ascendens, while 
the leaf-cells are larger than in what he considers the typical form of 
that species. Under Ch. ascendens he notes a plant from Norway 
with the cells of Ch. ascendens and a perianth approaching that of the 
same species but a little smaller and less inflated than in the American 
and Siberian specimens which he had studied. These are the forms 
which he suggests may belong to Ch. ascendens, although he leaves 
their determination in doubt. 
The writer in his own experience has sometimes found very diverse 
perianths even in a single tuft of plants. In fact the range of varia- 
tion is so wide and at the same time so indefinite that it seems im- 
possible to separate Ch. ascendens from Ch. pallescens on the basis of 
characters drawn from the perianth. "There are, indeed, intermediate 
forms between the two extremes which one student might refer to 
Ch. ascendens but which another student with equal reason might 
refer to Ch. pallescens. This being the case it seems advisable to 
include Ch. ascendens under Ch. pallescens as a slightly aberrant form. 
There is even a question as to whether Ch. pallescens ought to be 
separated specifically from Ch. polyanthus. Schiffner considers it a 
matter of taste whether it be looked upon as a “kleine Art," a sub- 
species, or a variety. The difference in the size of the leaf-cells is the 
only character in which he places much confidence, and this he admits 
is far from constant. If, however, Ch. ascendens is included under 
