FLOKA OF WASHINGTON AND VICINITY. 



39 



This table exhibits better perhai)s than any other the special charac- 

 teristics of the flora. The normal percentage being about 31, we see 

 that in all but live of these sixteen largest orders our flora is in excess of 

 that standard, while it is richest proportionally in the Cnpuliferce^ Rosa- 

 cea}, and Cruciferce, and poorest in the Filices and Leguminosw. 



Comparison of large genera. 



In like manner we may compare the 15 large genera given in a pre- 

 ceding table (p. 35) : 



M 



Genera. 



1 Carex 



2 Aster 



3 Panicum 



4 Solidago 



5 Quercus 



6 Polygonum . 



7 Desmodium . 



8 Salix 



9 Juncus 



10 Viola 



11 I Cyperus 



12 ' Ranunculus 



13 I Eupatorium 



14 Heiianthus . 



15 Asclepias . . . 



39 

 33 

 53 

 30 

 47 

 59 

 58 

 61 

 37 

 54 

 29 

 41 

 46 

 37 

 45 



This table shows that in all the large genera, except Solidago and 

 Cyperus^ the District of Columbia has more than its full proportion. The 

 genus Salix is the one proportionally best represented, while Polygo- 

 num,Desniodlu7n, Panicum^ and Viola each exceed 50 per cent. Quercus^ 

 Eupatorium, and Asclepias are also well tilled out. 



As already remarked, it would carry us too far to undertake the sys- 

 tematic comparison of our flora with those of other special localities, 

 even were Ihe data at hand. Few local catalogues are condensed and 

 summarized for this puri)ose, and the labor of doing this is very great. 

 The recently published Flora of Essex County, Massachusetts, prepared 

 by Mr. John Eobinson, however, forms something of an exception to 

 this, and we may directly compare the larger classes and also the orders. 

 The following tables will give an idea of the differences between that 

 flora and our own : 



