3 
1922] Wiegand,— Variation of Carex annectens 73 
A leaf like that shown in fig. 4 is certainly most unlike the one shown 
in fig. 20, but the transition between the two is perfect. Nearly 
all the leaf-forms occur at Wilmington, and at each station as the 
plant goes up our coast, where it seems to be confined to the tidal 
mud of river-estuaries, the extreme form tends to be less hastate but 
more subulate. 
Lophotocarpus spongiosus, then, grades into L. calycinus where the 
ranges of the two are coincident, but at the parts of its range more 
remote from £L. calycinus it shows well-marked extremes. It seems 
therefore to be better treated as a variety, just as Engelmann first 
described it, but under Lophotocarpus it becomes 
L. caLYciNUS (Engelm.) J. G. Smith, var. spongiosus (Engelm.) 
n. comb. Sagittaria calycina var. spongiosa Engelm., Gray’s Manual 
ed. 5, 493 (1867). Lophotocarpus calycinus J. G. Smith, Mem. Torr. 
Bot. Club, v. 25 (1894). L. spongiosus (Engelm.) J. G. Smith, Rev. 
of the Spec. of Loph. of the U. S.,4. (1899) and Rep. Mo. Bot. Gard., 
xi. 148 (1900). L. spatulatus J. G. Smith, Rev. of the Spec. of Loph. 
of the U. S., 5 (1899) and Rep. Mo. Bot. Gard., xi. 148 (1900). 
Lophiocarpus calycinus Micheli, DC. Monog. Phan. iii. 61 (1881). 
HARVARD UNIVERSITY. 
EXPLANATION OF PLATE 137. 
Figures 1-3. Lophotocarpus calycinus X l4. 
Figures 4-23. Lophotocarpus calycinus, var. spongiosus X l4. 
VARIATIONS OF CAREX ANNECTENS. 
K. M. WIEGAND. 
WHILE collecting in a field in which Carex vulpinoidea and C. annec- 
tens were very abundant, the writer was troubled by a third form 
that, though less abundant than either of the others, was represented 
by many fine clumps. An inspection of the manuals gave no help, 
and the problem was later taken up for study at the Gray Herbarium. 
It was possible to separate the material into two rather well marked, 
though somewhat intergrading strains, which accorded well with the 
observations in the field. On looking through the literature it was soon 
found that these two forms of C. annectens had already been distin- 
guished by Bicknell in 1896. "The two plants should be treated as 
follows: 
