OUR FRAGRANT WILDFLOWERS 



"^T EARLY two hundred fragrant wildflowers scattered 

 *** ~ through more than sixty plant families have been brought 

 to light as a result of our inquiry into the matter, and still the 

 list appears to be far from complete. This preliminary list, 

 however, will serve as an outline to which other species may 

 be added until such time as a fairly complete list is possible. 

 It is not likely that further additions will greatly change the 

 relative number of fragrant species in the different plant 

 families and we are thus warranted in considering - the heath, 

 lily, orchid and rose families as the leaders in fragrance. 

 When all the observations are in, it is possible some of the spe- 

 cies now listed will have to be dropped because not entirely con- 

 forming to our definition of fragrance. The writer would 

 scarcely include Ilex opaca among fragrant wildflowers, 

 though it may be possible that this species varies with the lo- 

 cality or even with the seasons in the amount of fragrance it 

 possesses. It is hoped that all interested will scan the list 

 closely and give their opinions on this and other disputed 

 points. Information regarding Trillin m sessile reported as 

 fragrant is especially solicited. This plant is very familiar to 

 the writer but he has never discovered any fragrance in it. 

 Can the difference be due to the locality? 



One of the surprising features of the list is the number 

 of white flowers recorded as fragrant. Nearly half of the 

 species included are of this color. Even when allowance is 

 made for the larger number of white flowers in our flora, the 

 disproportionate number of fragrant white flowers is still very 

 striking. In this magazine for March 1905 (Vol. 8 p. 41), 



