224 



subspecies or variety of P. cnspus and the same view has 

 Mr. Arthur Bennett in the Jrish Naturalist", 1894, p. 124 

 — 12G. There I do not agree with them. The authors of 

 the Mantissa place the plant as a later addition, therefore 

 as No. 21a, and as to the relationship they say that it is 

 „F.crispo maxime affinis", but nevertheless an independent 

 species. 



The next time we meet with the plant in the literature 

 is in a note by Caspary in „Bericht iiber die 15te Ver- 

 sammlung des preussischen bot. Vereins zu Konigsberg" 

 (Schriften der physikal.-okonom. Ges. zu Konigsberg, 18. Jahr- 

 gang, 1877, erste Abth. p. 97 ff.). Caspary describes the 

 plant in detail, shows its hybrid nature and takes it as a 

 hybrid of F. crispus and P. praelongus. P. undulatus Wolfg. 

 he does not seem to know. 



Eichwald in „Naturhist. Skizze von Lithauen" etc., 

 1830, names it subspecies or variety ol P. crispus (quoted from 

 Bennett 1. c). 



Ledebour: „FIora Rossica", vol. IV, p. 29 (1853) likewise. 



Iw. Schmalhausen: „Flora v. Siidwestrussland" (1866) 

 places the plant as synonymous with P. decipiens (quoted 

 from Nyman). 



Nyman: „Gonspectus Florae Europaeae". Supplem. II, 

 p. 287 refers to the preceding author. 



Richter: „Plantae Europaeae" (1890), p. 14 places it 

 as synonymous with P. crispus. 



B. Day don-Jackson: „Index Kewensis", vol. Ill (1894) 

 takes it as an independent species. 



Mr. Tiselius has labelled an original specimen „Nihil 

 aliud quam P. praelongus Wulf. mihi videtur". 



In several English journals is mentioned the finding of 

 a plant, which Messrs. Bennett and Fryer have referred 

 to P. undulatus Wolfg. This English plant which is described 

 in two main forms, var. Cooperi Fryer and var. Jacksoni 



