124 THE JOURNAL OK BOTANY 



lobes of the lowest flowers were very large, but rapidly decreased in 

 size until tbe upper lips were almost entire and very narrow, the 

 extreme measures being 10x6 mm. and 3x6 mm. 



The question of groups or subspecies of 0. ericetorum may now 

 be considered — in tbe first place tbe status of O. maculata prcecox 

 Webster {British Orchids, p. 54 (1886), p. 69, edn. 2, 1898) described 

 this as a very small form of O. maculata which he found in Car- 

 narvonshire, emphasizing its small size (4-7 inches), the early date 

 of its flowering (April and May as against July for the other form), 

 its love for very damp, elevated situations, and lastly the narrower 

 leaves and small centre-lobe which distinguish O. ericetorum from 

 O. Fuchsii. We have been over a good deal of ground in N. Wales, 

 but have never found any plant which exactly answers to this descrip- 

 tion. The average of all highland forms is certainly above six inches, 

 and in upland situations the time of flowering, in our experience, is 

 rather May-July, or even August. The habitat also is imperfectly 

 described ; such forms do often grow in very wet places, but that is 

 not the rule. They seem to prefer the zone between the wet and the 

 dry levels ; often, when traversing a piece of boggy ground, we have 

 made for the drier margin to look for the plants, and found them 

 there, almost as a matter of course. We are therefore quite confident 

 that O. prcecox is the same as the plant described some years later by 

 Linton (Fl. Bournemouth, 1902) as O. maculata subsp. ericetorum ; 

 the difference is owing to the fact that Webster has given a far too 

 restricted description, based on a batch of exceptionally small and 

 early-flowering plants. Both authors agree in assuming that the 

 strongly trilobed form is the true O. maculata of Linnaeus — a point 

 which will be discussed later. 



It is necessary to emphasize the fact that O. ericetorum may grow 

 to a very large size, and in this form may easily be mistaken for a 

 Marsh Orchis. It is probable that held botanists are apt to pass by 

 these large forms, without strict examination, as pale O. latifolia or 

 as hybrids, the more so as they are usually found in marshes with the 

 other forms. The determination of hybrids will be much affected by 

 the failure to note a possible parent. Plants over 5 dm. high are 

 common enough, usually with large and rather flat leaves, solid stems 

 and typical O. ericetorum flowers, the spur slender, sepals lax and 

 centre-lobe very small. 



Dr. Druce suggests, as indirectly did Camus in the reference given 

 further on, that the differences in this group of plants may be due to 

 differences of soil. Druce would assign 0. ericetorum to acid siliceous 

 areas : it is absent from large parts of the central and eastern counties. 

 O. O'Kellyi grows on calcareous well-drained soil, and O. Fuchsii 

 especially on chalk and basic cla} r . These forms may be most at 

 home in these different soils, but they are not rigidly confined to 

 them. 0. ericetorum and O. Fuchsii often grow together in lowland 

 positions ; m a field at Kerry, Montgomery, in a rich loamy clay 

 with no peat, both types occur in plenty. Here the leaves of 

 O. ericetorum, being in long grass, are flatter than if they grew in a 

 pasture, but are not of the Fuchsii type. Moreover, though this is 

 exceptional, we have seen flourishing colonies of both types growing 



