60 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY 



Elodea canadensis, Mich. " In the Whitadder and ponds, Dunse 

 Castle, Berwickshire, by Dr. Johnstone, some years ago."- M. Kirby, 

 "Fl. Leicestershire," 148 (published 1850). 



Corallorhiza innata, R. Br., 1777. "In a moist hanging wood 

 near the head of Little Loch Broom, on the western coast of Ross- 

 shire."- -Lightf., "Fl. Scot.," 523. 



Goodyera repens, R. Br. " We found it ... in an old shady 

 moist hanging birch wood . . . facing the house of Mr. Mackenzie 

 of Dundonald, about two miles from the head of Little Loch Broom 

 on the western coast of Ross-shire." Lightf, " Fl. Scot.," 520. 



Coehlearia mieaeea, n. sp. Under the above name Mr. E. S. 

 Marshall has described and figured a Coehlearia found by himself 

 on micaceous debris on Ben Lawers and Am Binnein in Perthshire, 

 and on Ben Dothaidh, in Argyle ; in all cases between 3000 and 

 3700 feet above sea-level. (He had already used the name C. con- 

 ferta in the herbarium, but has discarded it as not distinctive.) 

 Mr. Marshall gives a full description, and enters at considerable 

 length on the discussion of the allied forms of Cochlearia, pointing 

 out that "the dark green, glossy foliage and the perfectly smooth 

 fruits mark it off from all other British members of this family. The 

 differences from anglica, officinalis, and grcenlandica are so evident as 

 to scarcely need definition. Dr. Lange, to whom part of the 1891 

 gathering from Ben Lawers was sent, replied : Forsan distincta, ob 

 radicem perennem, sed proxime affinis C. danictz. The points of 

 divergence in living plants are, however, sufficiently obvious. In 

 micacea the root-leaves are more entire, coriaceous, ascending ; the 

 inflorescence is less terminal, the flowers being very much larger, 

 with a long claw to the petals, the pods smooth when ripe, the seeds 

 much larger and fewer (2 to 6, usually 4, as compared with up to 

 12 in C. danica). The only British species with which confusion 

 seems likely to arise is C. alpina, Watson, which I believe should 

 retain specific (or subspecific) rank. Dried flowering specimens of 

 the two are not always readily separable ; but the living material 

 may be differentiated by the following characters : Root-leaves of 

 alpina larger and coarser, with a deeper basal sinus, light green, 

 more flaccid andjthinner, more concave, with more evident veins. 

 Petals more gradually narrowed into a shorter claw, not rarely 

 pinkish. Upper stem-leaves with conspicuous auricles. Sepals light 

 green. Pods reticulate-veined when thoroughly ripe. Stems usually 

 more procumbent." 



He then compares micacea with two smooth-fruited forms, viz. : 



C. fenestrata, R. Br., which resembles C. anglica in leaf char- 

 acters, but with fruits terminal and crowded, and seeds small and 

 numerous. 



C. arctica, Schlecht, with which micacea has "much affinity." 



