236 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY 



gathered at Adrigole in Ireland, and which Mr. Pearson has 

 declared to belong to true P. exigua. The specimens of 

 this species which I have gathered in Dirdal near Stavanger 

 show, in general, bifid leaves, but occasionally one or other 

 which is trifid occurs. With regard to the size, my plant is 

 quite like P. exigua, but in the shape and in the deeper sinus 

 of the leaves it bears rather more likeness to P. tridenti- 

 culata. Stipules are present, but sparingly. It occurred 

 on a very shaded and wet side of rock." I have examined 

 an original specimen of P. exigua gathered by Taylor at 

 Cromaglown ; and it is, I consider, only a wet-ground form 

 of P, tridenticulata, and it is certainly not specifically 

 distinct from it. The two plants are stated as frequently 

 growing together ; and if my view of their relation be 

 correct, this is of course to be expected. I carefully 

 examined Taylor's specimen for such mixture, but failed to 

 find any other species. In the " Census" I gave P. tridenti- 

 culata as a synonymn, having taken Taylor as the author of 

 the species ; but on re-examination of Hooker's description 

 and figure of his Jung, spinulosa var. tridenticulata, I have 

 little doubt that Hooker intended the same plant. The 

 enlarged figure (Fig. 10 of Plate XIV.), though not accurate, 

 appears to me to represent the plant. It does not bear a 

 resemblance to any form of our other species. Hooker's 

 name has several years' priority over Taylor's. It is interest- 

 ing to note that Stephani in " Species Hepaticarum " queries 

 P. exigua as a synonymn of P. tridenticulata (Hook.). 



ALIEN PLANTS NEAR EDINBURGH. 

 By WILLIAM EVANS, F.R.S.E., and W. EDGAR EVANS. 



REFERRING to our paper on Alien Plants found in the 

 Edinburgh District, published in the July number of this 

 magazine (pp. 174-179), we have to add to the list the 

 following species, practically all gathered during the past 

 three months. Where no year is mentioned, 1904 is implied. 

 We have to thank Mr. Edmund Baker, of the British Museum, 

 for kindly giving us his opinion regarding a few of the 



