378 ON BROMUS ASPEU. 



bearing but a single spikelet ; the lateral nerves of the upper glumes 

 are furnished with cilia, and the sheaths of the upper leaves are gla- 

 brous. The spikelets of the latter also have a grey appearance, frora 

 the lovper pales being hairy up to the very apex. 



In the Eeport of the Botanical Exchange Club for 1867 (Journ, 

 Bot. Vol. VI. p. 71) the curators state that Herr von Uechtritz, of 

 Breslau, had referred to Beneken's species specimens sent to him from 

 Derbyshire, and that plants collected in North Yorkshire are the same, 

 but it is hinted that the characters distinguishing the two plants are 

 not very satisfactory ones, nor do they work well in practice. An ex- 

 amination of a larger series of specimens, has, however, shown that 

 while the characters taken from the leaves are of little value, diifer- 

 ences in the number and arrangement of the panicle branches seem to 

 hold good. As stated in this volume (p. 191), I have been unable to 

 find any British specimens which would not by panicle-characters have 

 to be referred to Beneken's B. serotinus, with the exception of a plant 

 in Sowerby's herbarium, labelled "near the 'Plough,' Camberwell." 

 This has a very full panicle, and there are five branches in the lowest 

 verticil ; the spikelets are smaller than in the ordinary English plant, 

 though containing on an average more florets ; in short, it has less of 

 the lax aspect of Festiica gigantea, and more the look of a large Serra- 

 falciis. It agrees with the plant from Belfort in Billot's Exsicc. n. 889, 

 called B. asper, Murr., and with specimens from the south of France 

 and frora Tyrol in the British Museum herbarium. All the other 

 European specimens I have had an opportunity of examining, appear 

 to be B. serotinus, which will probably be found to be the commoner 

 plant throughout Europe; from a note in the Bulletin of the Belgian 

 Botanical Society for 1870 (p. 149), it would seem to be the usual 

 form in Belgium. Sowerby's Camberwell plant may have been an in- 

 troduction. 



Mr. H. C. Watson has, in his ' Compendium ' (p. 450), very rightly 

 condemned the practice, not unfrequent among critical botanists, of 

 restricting to a rarer segregate the name of the old aggregate species, 

 whilst the far commoner, and therefore the type form, receives a new 

 name, and is thought to be a novelty. It is of course possible that a 

 name may have been too widely ajjplied, but in cases where all tlie segre- 

 gates are covered by the description of the aggregate, the original 

 name ought to be retained for the most usual variety. Now in the 



