^ 



THE 



J OUliNvVL OF 1U)T AN Y 



BRITISH AND FOREIGN. 



NOTES ON BRITISH EUPHRASIAS.— II. 

 Br H. W. PuosLEr, B.A., E.L.S. 



(Continued from Journ. Bot. 1919, 175.) 

 EUPHEA8I.\. CONFUSA Pugslcj^, 



Being interested in the yellow-flowered Eyebriglit o£ Exmooi', 

 which I had described in this Journal (Ivii. 169 ; 1919) as a new 

 species^ Enphrasia coiifnsa, I took the opportunity, while staying at 

 Lynniouth in September 1919, of visiting the plant in sitic in the 

 station discovered by the late E. S, Marshall near Simonsbath. The 

 Eyebright was growing there at that date in moderate quantitj^ over 

 a limited area, and I quickly noticed, as Mr. Marshall had done, that 

 the hue of its flowers varied in different individuals from straw- 

 colour to a deep orange-buff. With these yellow- flowered plants, 

 however, and extending over a wider stretch of ground, there grew a 

 white -flowered form that seemed to differ only in the tint of its 

 corolla ; and on sul)sequently examining the specimens then collected 

 I was unable to find any other point of distinction, unless that, on an 

 average, the white- flowered plants were a little more vigorous. 



Mr. Hiern, in his account of this Euphrasia in Journ. Bot. xlvii. 

 170 (1909), remarked that with tlie yellow-flowered plant grew a 

 greater abundance of specimens having "whitish or purj)lish flowers, 

 though in other respects scarcely differing. But he excluded tliese 

 latter forms from his description and made no attempt to define 

 them. 



Last winter I received from Mr. F. Rilstone dwarf examples of a 

 similar Eyebright bearing white flowers, collected the previous summer 

 on St. Cleer Dov^is and Helmen Tor, in East Cornwall. Mr. Rilstone 

 identified these plants with E. con^iisa, although he could meet only 

 with white flowers. 



On seeing this fresh material I was led to re-examine the dwarf, 

 branched Enphrasice of my herbarium, and I now think that the 

 plant from Derwentwater sent to the Botanical Exchange Club l>v 

 Mr. Pearsall in 1918 as " E. Kerneri^ sinmlating E. minima'''' should 

 be regarded as an identical form. It is possible that some of the 

 plants referred to E. minima var. arhascicla Bueknall may also 

 belong here, but I do not possess any material that can be so named. 

 Journal of Botaxv. — Vol. (30. [Jaxuakt, 1922.] b 



