1908. Notes. 77 



Mosses of Co. Dublin. 



. In the list of Mosses of Lambay, given at pp. 100-103 of the Irish 

 Naturalist for 1907, ten species are n.arked with an asterisk as being 

 " New to Co. Dublin." This statement, however, requires correction, as 

 fovir of these — viz., Grimniia apocarpa, Ba'hula cylindrical Trichostomum 

 tnutabik, and Brynm murale — had been collected in this county fifty 

 years previously, and the specimens are in the Herbarium of the' Science 

 and Art Museum ; while two were recorded from the same county, 

 thirt}'^ years ago, by the late Dr. David Moore, of Glasnevin Royal 

 Botanical Gardens, one i^Trichostovuim tenuirostre) in his "Synopsis of 

 Irish Mosses," published in the Proceedni^^s of the R.I. Academy for 1872, 

 and the other ( IVeissia rupcstris) in the Proceedings of the Royal Dublin 

 Society for 1878. 



H. W. Lett. 

 Loughbrickland. 



There is no locality given in the late Dr Moore's work on the Mosses 

 of Ireland for Grimmia apocarpa ; he describes it as common; it is not 

 mentioned in his list of Dublin and Wicklow mosses, and I feel justified> 

 therefore, in recording the localic}^ for it. Bryum murale is published in 

 the same work (p. 82) as /3. erythrocarpa, j3. murorum, collected near 

 Killarnej' by Hunt. Trichostomum mutabile —thero: is no locality given for 

 Dublin; he writes, " Frequent in southern counties " IVeissia rupestris 

 is given under the name of Gyvinostomum rupestre^ and Trichostomum 

 tenuirostre under the name of Didymodon cylmdricus. The asterisk to this 

 and others, if I mistake not, was duly deleted by me when correcting 

 proofs. I am sorry I have not time at my disposal to search herbaria 

 for such records, having only a few hours to spare some days in the 

 week, I used the asterisk to denote '' not previously recorded from Co. 

 Dublin," and the presence of unrecorded specimens in a herbarium does 

 not invalidate my statement. 



D. M*Ardi.e. 



Glasnevin, 



EropMla prsecox and Vicia Orobns. — Corrections. 



In making up my recent paper on Additions to Irish Topographical 

 Botany in 1906-7, two slight errors were observed which might possibly 

 mislead if not corrected. In recording Erophila prczcox from Gal way and 

 Clare as new to Ireland (/. N., xv., 155), Mr. Phillips overlooked C. P. 

 Hurst's Clifden record for the same plant (/. N., xi., 45). Again, Mr. 

 Druce cites Vicia Orobus from Church Island, S. E. Galway, as new to Dis- 

 trict VI. (/. JV., xvi., 148). But it is recorded from this district (Castle- 

 Lambert, N. E. Galway) in Cybele Hibernica, Ed. II. 



R. Lr,. Praeger. 

 Dublin. 



A 3 



