BOTANICAL NOTES AND NEWS 123 



Scrophularia umbrosa, Dumort. ( = S. Ehrharti, C. A. Stevens), 

 1840, Edinburgh. " Mr. W. H. Campbell, Cramond Woods ; West 

 Lothian, D. A. Hunter." C. A. Stevens, in " Annals Nat. Hist," i. 

 1840. 



Veronica Tournefortii, C. C. Gmel. ( = V. Buxbaumii, Ten.), 

 1829. "In the shrubbery in front of the house at Whiterig, Ber- 

 wickshire. Borrer . . . found it several years ago near Henley 

 [Henfield] in Sussex." G. Johnston in "Flora of Berwick-upon- 

 Tweed," p. 225. 



V. alpina, L., 1790. Found by James Dickson "in montibus 

 prope Garway Moor, et in Ben Nevis" in 1789 ("Trans. Linn. 

 Soc.," ii. 287). 



V. frnticans, Jacq. (= V. saxati/is, Scop.), 1790. Found by 

 James Dickson on Ben Lawers in 1789 ("Trans. Linn. Soc.," 

 ii. 288). 



[NOTE. It is curious that Cuscuta europcea should have been 

 recorded as British from Aberdeen, as the above note implies. It 

 could have occurred only as a " casual " ; and I am not aware of its 

 ever bavins; been found again near Aberdeen. It is almost needless 



o o 



to add that no Cuscuta is indigenous there. Veronica Tournefortii is 

 now common in the north-east of Scotland ; indeed, its larger size 

 and more showy flowers make it often more noticeable than V. 

 agrestis in our cultivated ground. J. W. H. T.] 



Notes on Parka deeipiens. Four slides of the sporocarps of 

 Parka received from Mr. James Reid through Sir William Uawson, 

 1 8th December 1893, were examined by me under the numbers 

 i, 2, 3 (a, b, c, d\ and 4. 



No. i shows a fine macrospore 43*2 //, in diameter, and many 

 smaller round bodies of somewhat variable size, chiefly i4 - 4/x-i6//, 

 in diameter. These are probably the microspores, though they do 

 not show the oval form of, and are rather larger than, the original 

 specimens. 



No. 2 shows an undoubted cellular structure, which probably 

 represents the macrospores in an early state of development, possibly 

 the sporangia. 



No. 3 shows in all four sporocarps undoubted cellular tissue. 

 From the fact that the cells are loosely aggregated, and that they 

 measure about 38-4^ in diameter, I conclude that they must be 

 macrospores in situ. But as the walls of these bodies are thin, I 

 infer that they are in an undeveloped state ; and this view would 

 seem to be strengthened by the occurrence of numerous isolated 

 bodies of a similar nature in the neighbourhood of $d. 



No. y shows the spores in situ particularly well, as also 

 does a. 



No. 4 shows nothing beyond one or two macrospores. 



