286 EEPORT OF THE BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB. 



leaves are generally quite glabrous by the time the plant is in flower, 

 but occasionally traces of them may be observed even in full-grown 

 leaves. The underside is clothed with grey arachnoid pubescence 

 varying much in thickness and frequently nearly disappearing in the older 

 leaves. The flowers are a little larger than those of the Mountain Ash, of 

 a purer white, though^still tinged with cream- colour, and have precisely 

 the same pleasant scent as those of the Mountain Ash. The fruit is 

 said by Mr. Duthie to have a sweet taste, while Fries describes the 

 fruit as acid. Taste at the best is not only indefinite, but we want 

 standards to go by. Thus IS'yman in his " Sveriges Fanerogamer " 

 describes the fruit as "less sour than those of the Mountain Ash," 

 '' rather sweet-sour." Now sour is a term I should never apply to the 

 berries of the Mountain Ash. In Arran P. femiica grows in Glen 

 Catacol, in the vicinity of P. scandica and P. Aiccuparia. I saw but 

 one tree of it, close by over a dozen of P. scandica, but Mr, Duthie 

 found several trees on the opposite side of the same burn. The tree 

 which I saw was apparently the normal P. fennica of Scandinavia, at 

 least its leaves quite resembled those of specimens I have received 

 from Norway and Sweden ; but Mr. Duthie collected specimens from 

 diff'erent trees, some of which approach closely to scandica, and 

 some of them to Aucuparia. Those which approached scandica have 

 many of the leaves only lobed, only the most vigorous having one or 

 sometimes two pairs of pinnae separated. The under side of the leaves 

 of these specimens are very thickly grey-felted, and though gathered 

 in the month of July they have not become nearly glabrous. At the 

 other extremity of the scale there are specimens with the greater part of 

 the leaf pinnate, there being three or four pairs of pinnae and not more 

 than three lobes on each side ; beyond the pinnae the pubescence on the 

 under side is much less dense, and in some of the older leaves is only 

 observable on minute examination. My belief is that P. fennica is a 

 hybrid between P. scandica and P. Aucuparia. Against this it may 

 be alleged that it is said to be common in Norway, while P. scandica 

 is rare there. But ten years ago it would have been said that P. 

 fennica grew in Arran and P. scandica did not. P. fennica is not un- 

 frequently seen in plantations. I have specimens from the Rev. A. 

 Bloxam, labelled '* Pyrus pinnatifida, the Altons, near Ashby, Leicester- 

 shire, May, 1845," and a doubtful one from G. L. Sandys, labelled 

 ^' Pyrus pinnatifida, ^evvj Hill, near Copford, Dean Forest, Glou- 

 cester, 1841. (Mr. H. C. Watson has a specimen with the same label, 

 which he thinks is the same as the Chambery plant. See below.) 

 My specimen is too imperfect to be sure of, but I think it is nearest P. 

 fennica. But Arran seems to be its only native station in Britain. 

 Smith included P. fennica and P. seniipinnata under his P. pinna- 

 tifida. I have seen no Continental specimens, except from Scandi- 

 navia, and doubt its occurrence in any place beyond the range of 

 P. scandica ; there are no specimens of it in the collection of Sorhi 

 Bent by Prof. Beichenbach. 



6. Pyrus semipiimata. Roth. All the Scandinavian specimens 

 which I have seen named Sorhus hyhrida clearly belong to P. fen- 

 nica, but those sent under the name of Sorhus hybrida from all other 

 Continental localities diftcr from P. fennica in several particulars. The 

 leaves are narrower. There is usually only one pair of pinnae, and 



