178 



Atmnania coccinca^ Rottb. Has a range in Illinois as far north 

 as Kankakee, and thence south through the State (Patterson, 1. c.). 



Utricularia rcsupinata, B. D. Greene. Lake Co, Ind. (Bot. 

 Gaz., viii, 187), Very abundant on the east shore of Woodard 

 Lake, lona Co., Mich. (Wheeler S: Smith, I. c). This brings its 

 range much farther west than Prcsque Isle, Pa. 



Jiinciis Greoiii, Oakes and Tuckerm. As far west as Kanka- 

 kee, 111. (Patterson, 1. c). Lake Co., Tnd. (Cat of Ind. Plants, 

 1 881). Said in the Manual to occur on the east shore of Lake 

 Michigan. The older edition mentioned the east side of the State 

 near Detroit. Are these the same? 



Finibristylis spadicea^ VahL, var. castanea, Gray. PVequent 

 at the head of Lake Michigan, from Chicago east. Also in three 



other counties of Illinois — Kankakee, St. Clair and Henderson 



(Patterson, 1. c). The last two border the Mississippi, St- Clair 



Co. being opposite St. Louis. Attention was first called to this 



and the preceding plant, together with Rynchospora cyviosa, 



Nutt., In the Entomologist and Botanist of St. Louis, conducted 

 by Drs. Riley and Vasey (Vol. ii. p. 384). This was in 1870, 

 the three plants having been found growing together in Kanka- 

 kee Co, All grow together in Lake Co., Ind. The Jiiucus and 

 Rynchospora have the same range so far as known in Illinois and 

 Indiana, and the Fimbristylis has been found with them, but with 

 a wider range. All are representatives of eastern plants that 

 come to the lake region and the Mississippi. 



Agropyrum violaccnm^ Lange. Lake Co., Ind. (Cat. of Plants 

 of Ind., 1881). 



Potamogeton Robbinsii, Oakes. In Cedar Lake, Lake Co., 

 Ind. (Bot. Gaz. 1888). 



N.K. Ohio, at Ashtabula. This 



ygeton Hilliiy Moron g 



was the locality where the specimens were found that afterwards 

 led to its specific distinction. (Bot. Gaz., v. 53, vi. 290). 



Aster ptarrnicoides, Torr. & Gray. var. lutcscens, Gray. The 

 Manual states that this plant ranges from N. Ill to the Saskatche- 

 wan. But this is not based on facts. Having first mentioned the 

 presence of this plant at Englewood, I may be at fault for some 

 of this misconception. It was stated in a note in the Bot. Gaz. 

 (xiv. 153) that it was Dr. Gray's opinion that it might have come 

 in by the way of the lakes, or might be a remnant of a flora once 

 continuous, since it was known to be found in British America. 

 It was further stated that Upham thought it probable the plant 



