NOTES ON CAREX. 



245 



i. 778 (18i3), as a var. of paradoxa. This was found at Seaman's 

 Moss Pits, near Manchester, and was the cause of a rather acri- 

 monious discussion. In the Loud. Cut. of 1844: it stood as a var. of 

 C. tcreiimcula, and, judging by the specimens in the Boswell Her- 

 barium, that is its correct place ; it is near to, but not exactly the 

 same as, Hartman's vnr. crasainr. 



C. PANicuLATA L. var. RiGiDA Blytt in lUt. Cfr. Blytt in Christ. 

 Vid. Selsk. Forsh. No. 7, p. 8 (1886). Spikes more rigid, darker 

 coloured, and with the spikelets more crowded. 



C. MURicATA L. Richter has "var. (,//<'us Lam.," but it has been 

 suggested that Lamarck's plant is not the same as Koch's. I cannot 

 answer this query, for I haw not seen a specimen of Lamarck's. 

 Lang in Linnaa, xxiv. 516 (1851), makes Lamarck's plant a species. 



C. ECHiNATA Murray. C. echinata (3. f/n/pos Hartm. Hand. Sk. 

 Fl. (1819). C. ynjpos Sohkuhr, Riedo. Nachtr. 18, f. 193 (1806). 



C. HELvoLA Blytt ap. Fries, Bot. Not. 58 (1819). Gathered by 

 Dr. Balfour on Lochnagar three years before Blytt's plant was 

 named, and labelled " ( '. curtd var. alpicola," Journ. Hot. 149 (1886). 

 There are other specimens that are probably this, but opportunity 

 to dissect them has not yet been taken. Kihlman {Mcdd. Faun, et 

 Fl. Fenn. 69 (1889)), considers helvola as hybrid between C. lacfopina 

 and C. canescens (carta); this may likely be the case, as on Loch- 

 nagar, where lagopina certainly grows near, and probably curta, or 

 its var. nipicola. 



C. APPRoxiMATA Hoppc ex Hoffm. Fl. Dent. ed. 2, ii. 200 (1800). 

 As there is an earlier appro.vimata of Allioni, Fl. Fed. ii. 267 (1785) 

 (now considered a var. oi eriretonim), the name laiiopina Wahl. Act. 

 Hob)}. 145 (1808), may be restored. Kichter has C. Lac/unalii 

 Schkr. Car. t. 7, f. 79 (1801). I have not seen a specimen. 



C. CURTA Good. [3. nipicola (Wahlb.). The enclosing brackets 

 are not needed, as Wahlenberg described it as a variety [Fl. Lapp. 

 232 (1812)), but under C. canescens L. The proper name under 

 C. curia seems to be var. brunnescens Pers. Siju. ii. 539 (1807). 

 Nyman makes a subspecies of C.\ vitilis Fr. under C. Persoonii. 

 Andersson joined it with C. Persoonii (Herb. Fl. Aust. n. 282, ex 

 Lang, in IJinuea, xxiv. 539 (1851) ). Have we in Britain any 

 plant other than a variety of C. curta / I have seen no specimens 

 that 1 could call <J. vitilis Fr. ; all seem, more or less, forms of 

 C. curta, to the extremes of which var. alpicola may be applied. 

 Dr. Boswell seems to have thought the same, for in the Kxch. Club 

 Hep. 1876, 87 (1878), he remarks : " This is all we have to represent 

 alpicola in Scotland, and when cultivated it is scarcely to be dis- 

 tinguished from ordinary curia. I have some doubt if we have true 

 C vitilis in Britain." 



C. ovALis Good. There are perhaps older names for this, but 

 certainty must be shown before they can be adopted. S. Gibson's 

 var. bracteata does not seem to have been described, as he denies 

 the identity of the Castle Morton plant, and called that C. }[aliern- 

 eusis {Plujtol. i. 715 (1843)). 



